Doug Henwood wrote: > > On May 27, 2008, at 9:18 PM, raghu wrote: > > I understand the risk v. uncertainty intuitively but is it even > > possible to give a coherent definition? Are these two categories as > > sharp as they appear to be? > > Keynes, "The General Theory of Employment" (journal article, not the > book): > > > By 'uncertain' knowledge, let me explain, I do not mean merely to > > distinguish what is known for certain from what is only probable. > > The game of roulette is not subject, in this sense, to uncertainty; > > nor is the prospect of a victory bond being drawn.... Even the > > weather is only moderately uncertain. The sense in which I am using > > the term is that in which the prospect of a European war is > > uncertain, or the price of copper and the rate of interest twenty > > years hence, or the obsolescence of a new invention, or the > > position of private wealth-owners in the social system in 1970. > > About these matters there is no scientific basis on which to form > > any calculable probability whatever. We simply do not know
I would include among those matters which "We simply do not know" the rise of mass popular movements (such as the civil-rights movement. They are utterly unpredictable, which is why we must always act as though one is about to burst upon us in the next five years. It is because various left individuals & grouplets so act that, when such a mass movement arises, the experienced local cadre are available. This means that whole generations of leftists must 'waste' their entire lives preparing for occasions which are in Keynes's terminology "uncertain." Doug has called this fatalism, if I understand him, but it is no more fatalist than Keynes. Carrol _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
