Comments on: Reforms don’t lack a human face http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/ Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:04:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Ravikiran http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2538 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2538 Did he say "impossible to function" or "impossible to fathom" about the Verbal Terrorist? The latter makes more sense. Did he say “impossible to function” or “impossible to fathom” about the Verbal Terrorist? The latter makes more sense.

]]> by: Sunil http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2539 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2539 I didnt know that Jagdish Bhagwati, Amartya Sen and Manmohan Singh were in Cambridge around the same time. Could be the premise of a movie.... three intellectuals, and the divergent choices they made..very filmy!! :-) I didnt know that Jagdish Bhagwati, Amartya Sen and Manmohan Singh were in Cambridge around the same time. Could be the premise of a movie…. three intellectuals, and the divergent choices they made..very filmy!!
:-)

]]> by: nivas http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2540 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2540 Hi yazad, I have been reading your blog for sometime and though most of your posts are well written, i don't agree with some of them - like this one. You seemed to have used the interview to discredit some chosen people, but in the same interview i found this- "But Chomsky is the only serious person there because Chomsky is the world’s greatest linguist. He is a man who is known for his intelligence and ability and invariably you get arguments you can put your teeth into. Most of the time I do disagree but he’s really an intellectual" Given that Chomsky's views are usually against globalization (with which i may or may not agree with), you ought to have quoted this for completeness. AR is often accused of selective quoting, but aren't you doing the same ? BTW, i have a "Fountainhead" review in <a href="http://pseudorandomscribblings.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">my blog </a>and some interesting observations on objectivists and libertarians - thought you may be interested. Hi yazad,
I have been reading your blog for sometime and though most of your posts are well written, i don’t agree with some of them - like this one.
You seemed to have used the interview to discredit some chosen people, but in the same interview i found this-
“But Chomsky is the only serious person there because Chomsky is the world’s greatest linguist. He is a man who is known for his intelligence and ability and invariably you get arguments you can put your teeth into. Most of the time I do disagree but he’s really an intellectual”
Given that Chomsky’s views are usually against globalization (with which i may or may not agree with), you ought to have quoted this for completeness.
AR is often accused of selective quoting, but aren’t you doing the same ?

BTW, i have a “Fountainhead” review in my blog and some interesting observations on objectivists and libertarians - thought you may be interested.

]]> by: Yazad http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2541 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2004/11/30/reforms-dont-lack-a-human-face/#comment-2541 Hi Nivas. I provided the link to the complete interview for exactly the same reason -- people who wished to, could check it out. There are constraints of space and I wanted to selectively quote Bhagwati. His points on Arundhati Roy and Joseph Stiglitz are far more interesting. His take on Chomsky was the boring "I think he's a great linguist, but I disagree with him on many topics". Advocates of "completeness," I'm afraid, would be happy only when everything is quoted, which is not always possible. Hi Nivas.

I provided the link to the complete interview for exactly the same reason — people who wished to, could check it out.

There are constraints of space and I wanted to selectively quote Bhagwati. His points on Arundhati Roy and Joseph Stiglitz are far more interesting. His take on Chomsky was the boring “I think he’s a great linguist, but I disagree with him on many topics”.

Advocates of “completeness,” I’m afraid, would be happy only when everything is quoted, which is not always possible.

]]>