women in ren. energy wkshp
Women in Renewable Energy workshop, June 25, Fairmont Hotel San Jose, CA, 1-4pm $25 303/443-3130 Amer. Solar Energy Society Jessie Audette, Sue DeWitt, Elaine Hebert, Claire Nordvik, Nancy Rader, and Marianne Walpert discuss opportunities for women in renewable energy and the impacts of women in technical and policy aspects of the renewable energy field. This workshop precedes the annual Amer. Solar Energy Soc. conference.
Re: Facts Values
Dear Alan
your summary position was useful and gave me room for thought. i do not think
that my position can be summarised as being that of a person with a (dangerous)
little dose of sociology of knowledge or that of a non-reflective or
pretentious sceptic.
i agree of-course that we can agree to call certain things "facts of the
matter" for the sake of discussion. but as you say, there is no such thing as
an "uninterpreted fact", which you seem to dismiss as a trivial statement
("if that is all they want they can have it").
that establishes the point of my contribution however naive you may see it.
take an example, we might agree on an accounting convention which we call
profits. this is presumably one of your matters of fact. how do we treat this
accounting fact?
you failed to mention that i have been arguing that the goal of enquiry is not
to merely identify matters of fact but to explain them in some way. explanation
is ultimately the domain of the subjective. the matter of fact profits is
interpreted in one way or another depending on whether you believe say, in a
surplus mechanism or say, a marginal productivity world. the facts cannot
independently say which mechanism (surplus or MPT or any other for that matter)
is the true one. it comes down to your own prejudices and beliefs. so a useful
way of proceeding in the first instance is to understand why a neoclassical
person, for example, says profits are a return to exchange behaviour and why
for a marxist, they are a return to the particular social ownership of capital
resources.
a radical, according to this, knows the fact that they interpret profits in a
way which captures their pardigmic belief, the mainstreamer, i think, attempts
to hide the resort to belief by asserting that the axiomatic structure is
independent of ones values. The latter assertion then allows them to parade as
scientists and gain the accrued status that this connotes.
it is not an inconsistency to say that it there is no f v distinction when it
matters. that statement in itself is a reflection of my beliefs and hence the
arguments in this area when pushed always recurse back to i think it is because
i do.
kind regards
bill
***
William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\
Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about
The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*-- here
Callaghan NSW 2308v
Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
JOB ANOUNCEMENT
A prestigious new research institution in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, is seeking __ Chief, Information Systems Concepts and Design __ To lead and supervise the Computer Department that manages and maintains the Center's computer network and information systems including the Internet connection. Equally important, the incumbent is the Center's principal resource person on the design and implementation of research methodologies utilized by the research staff. We are seeking an experienced individual who holds a Ph.D. degree in a social science discipline with extensive background in quantitative methods and computers. The ideal candidate should have extensive experience in all aspects of sample surveys including sample designs (single stage, multi stage, cluster and stratified random sampling), writing of questionnaires, implementation of surveys by phone, mail and in-person, analysis of data and report preparations using graphic packages. Also, experience in computer modeling and computer-based interactive research methodology is required. An added plus would be administrative experience in a comparable position. The Center, a non-profit and independent institution, is engaged in research and policy analysis of international, political, economic and social issues affecting the UAE and the Gulf region. It is equipped with modern, state-of-the-art data processing and telecommunications facilities, and employs an international and highly trained staff. The position offers a competitive compensation package that includes a salary commensurate with qualifications and experience, housing and complete medical benefits. Detailed curriculum vitae and samples of the candidate's writings should be forwarded before August 1, 1994. to: Recruitment Committee P.O. Box 4567 Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Fax number : 9712 - 767799
JOB ANNOUNCEMENT2
A prestigious new research institution in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, is seeking a __ Head of the Information and Documentation Division __ To lead a professional staff of writers, mass communications specialists, translators, information and computer specialists assigned to the Division's departments of Computer, Information and Media, Translation, and the Federation Library. The Division has the overall functions of providing professional support to the Center's researchers, to produce and edit a newsletter and a professional journal, and to translate and publish books and proceedings of conferences and symposia. We are seeking an experienced individual who holds a relevant degree or degrees in social science, mass communications, or journalism from a respected university. The ideal candidate should be fluent in at least the English and Arabic languages, have a record of professional accomplishments with a comparable institution, and is capable of providing effective administrative leadership to the Division's diverse departments. The Center, a non-profit and independent institution, is engaged in research and policy analysis of international, political, economic and social issues affecting the UAE and the Gulf region. It is equipped with modern, state-of-the-art data processing and telecommunications facilities, and employs an international and highly trained staff. The position offers a competitive compensation package that includes a salary commensurate with qualifications and experience, housing and complete medical benefits. Detailed curriculum vitae, a statement describing the contributions the candidate feels will make to success of the Division along with non-returnable samples of the applicant writings, should be forwarded before August 1, 1994, to: Recruitment Committee P.O. Box 4567 Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates Fax number : 971 2 767799
Re: quote of the day
A quick note on this. The situation is, as usual, complex. At the Federal level, there are 2 chambers. The first (q equivalent to the US Congress, I guess) is elected on a geographic basis with about 60K voters. We have a preferential system, which modifies first past the post (you give your 1st pref to AB, but if he/she has the lowest total, pass your vote to CD...), but basically you need to get 40% or better of the priamary vote to win. So only strong indivudual candidates can win from non-mainstream candidates, andwe have about 3 of those out of about 130. The secnond chamber is based on the States, has 12(?) per state, and votes on a perfe percentage basis. So with about 6-8% of the vote, a party gets a candidate elected. This is the source of most of our non-mainstream political parties' representation, abnd there are about 8 indivuduals out of about 70. The two major groups are the Greens; a left-ecological party with 2 members from one State (which is an anomaly; they are unlilely to get 2 next time) and the Democrats, which are a liberal party with non- neoclassical flavour to some of their economic policies; otherwise midedle middle (!) of the road. Our States reflect a similar pattern between the two chambers. Overall, there is quite a degree of community politics in this country, and a fringe of involvement in the mainstream political channels. Most of the community politics is ecologically based. Cheers, Steve Keen
PROUT and localism
I have heard of PROUT, but cannot place it for now. I'm a little suspicious, for a number of reasons. Two of those reasons pertain to many "localistic" agenda, not just PROUT, so they are worth mentioning in a broader context. (1) A lot of the inefficiencies associated with group activity appear to appear quite rapidly. I think that when you go from an individual to a small group, the "inefficiency curve" rises steeply, and then levels off as you go from a small to a large group. It's only a hunch; I would be curious to know if anyone has tackled this issue formally. But if it is true, that means that beyond some point, one large organization would be less "bureaucratic" than many small ones. Localism would then lead to more hassles of all kinds, not less. (2) Most localist agenda refer to "local people." What place will there be for "rootless cosmopolitans"? Will mobility be reduced as part of this agenda? ..Michael Brun -- Michael J. Brun ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 408 W. Elm, #3, Urbana, IL 61801, USA, (217) 344-5961
Re: Fact and Value
[10 paragraphs, ~1.5 pages] On Sun, 19 Jun 1994 23:17:32 -0700 Alan G. Isaac wrote, I sparked a few reactions with my observation:"No one can really dispute the fact/value distinction. To attempt to do so is to accept it." ... For reasons that I think I am beginning to understand -- possibly turning on the semantics of the word 'fact' -- this statement required elaboration. One reason that this statement required elaboration is that the logic behind it requires particular definitions of fact, value, fact/value distinction, and dispute in order to stand as valid. Which means that the validity depends upon being able to presume on these particular uses of these terms being commonly understood. This presumption is questionable since one may recoignize make several distinct fact/value distinction, based on what a fact is though to be, what a value is thought to be, and how it is though that a distinction can be drawn between things of these types. The question may be which fact / value distinction to draw, rather than whether one can draw THE fact value distinction. So I noted: "My comment was not meant as an attack on efforts to develop a sociology of knowledge. [a] It is an attack on the naive, self-refuting view that a sociology of knowledge can vitiate the fact/value distinction. [b] That is, I am simply attacking the idea that one might provide an argument that the fact of the matter is that there is no such thing as the fact of the matter." [a] =/= [b] The "naive, self-refuting view" (NSRV) that a sociology of knowledge can vitiate the fact/value distinction does not follow from the statement that the fact of the matter is that there is no fact of the matter, nor does the latter statement follow from this former. Where does this (NSRV) come from? Itis a reaction to a particular naive concept of what "the" distinction between facts and values. "Facts are stuff out there that just are, and values are things inside people's heads, and we have a far more reliable guide to action if we build models which are based entirely on those things out there." Such naivete is rife in the profession. This is not surprising in view of the fact that it is mathematical sophistication which is selected for, and the ONLY contact that some people have with this question is the intro lecture for Principles. It is THIS fact/value distinction, in its Cartesian, popperian, or sophomoric guises, which the NSRV vitiates. The problem arises that if the common folkview is that facts are these things out there, and you learn that what has been treated as things out there are instead parts of conceptual systems inside peoples heads, you have to choose between adopting a more useful definition of fact (presuming one exists) and leaving the term fact to apply to the empty catagory which (it seems) Alan Isaacs would refer to as "uninterpreted facts". An memorable aphorism for expressing the tension between these two options is "the fact of the matter is that there is no fact of the matter", where the former fact is a soc. of knowledge fact, and the latter a Cartesian fact. At which point Bill Mitchell's statement form Sun, 19 Jun 1994 18:37:25 -0700 seems relevant: i have said that events can even be shared across value groups. but ultimately to go from an acknowledgment of what we choose to term events (without any certainty that anything exists i should add), to using the events to explain the behaviour is where the f and v distinction collapses. that is all i have been saying here. Both orthodox and non-orthodox paradigms must invoke values to frame inquiry. How are the (sociology of knowledge) facts of the matter to be used in constructing conceptual systems which we can use to explain behavior? As I read him, Bill is asserting that the distinction between facts and values is not a useful distinction to draw in this process. But the point I proposed above is that there are multiple potential distinctions to consider. Is this simply a terminological dispute, in which what Alan seeks to use, in the way he seeks to use it, is acceptable to Bill and what Bill proposes to abandon Alan would agree to abandon? Or are Alan and Bill able to agree that there is a thing which may be plausibly labelled a fact, but still disagree on whether the fact/value distinction is an effective distinction to make when we try to explain behavior. I have my suspicions, but reading what Alan and Bill have to say is far more likely to provide a persuasive answer. Virtually, Bruce McFarling, Pellissippi State [EMAIL PROTECTED] (through July 1)
Re: downsizing and performance related pay
Downsizing creates short term benefits for top executives whose pay has a large "performance-related" component. While in the first year there may be charges to the profit and loss account which reduce profits in the next years the effect of sharply lowered expenses on profits produces an upward trend in profits for which top managers should be rewarded, n-est-ce pas? Moreover as performance related pay became a standard part of executive compensation at lower levels in the organization, lower level managers could play this game. Instead of everyone taking in everyone else's laundry, the new economy is everyone firing everyone below them on the totem pole which produces productivity increases that need to be rewarded. The last one left get's it all. Penny Ciancanelli Manchester UK
Re: quote of the day
Perhaps I should mention that the reason I am interested in this question is to understand the issues with the federation of some of the micro-states of the Eastern Caribbean which is at present a possibility. They will be faced with the same constitutional question that Australia was: how do you make a federal parliamentary system work? If I have understood this correctly, the Australian and U.S. Senate are constitutionally very similar, but due to each U.S. Senator being selected in a first-past-the-post statewide poll and Australian senators being selected by a quota system the resulting representations are quite different. A further query: I have gained the impression that third parties in Australian lower house elections can have an influence depending on where their followers through their vote. Does this only work when the third parties that emerge take positions between the two biggest parties, or can progressive parties influence elections by this route as well?
Listserv help
Folk, Sorry to take up space here, folk, but I can't reach either the pen-l-request or the owner addresses. Could the list managers contact me by private email so we can figure out why I'm not reaching the proper list server? Thanks, Will Hull [EMAIL PROTECTED] UCSC Sociology Board
Re: facts and values e
Bill writes: what i have been leading up to is this: gil says i insulted him by saying he was mainstream but still maintains the popperian line that testing is achievable using objectified data. For what it's worth, this representation is doubly inaccurate. First, I never said that "testing is achievable using objectified data." I said there was a meaningful distinction between fact and value, which is something quite different (as the subsequent discussion has confirmed); in particular the statement doesn't suggest that data are "objectified". Second, I didn't say I was insulted by Bill's inference that I was "mainstream" (also "non- progressive", in his original broadside); I said that argument ad hominem, which Bill used, besides being fallacious, is insulting-- characterizing the argument, not the relationship between these particular arguers. I was not writing in a state of high dudgeon. Finally, also for what it's worth, "maintaining a popperian line" doesn't imply "being mainstream", though it may be a symptom of that malady. Gil [[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Re: Facts Values
--( Forwarded letter 1 follows ) Date: Mon, 20 Jun 94 13:57 EDT To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: "Peter.Dorman" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Facts Values Bill M. writes: "the matter of fact profits is interpreted in one way or another depending on whether you believe say, in a surplus mechanism or say, a marginal productivity world. the facts cannot independently say which mechanism (surplus or MPT or any other for that matter)is the true one. it comes down to your own prejudices and beliefs." While I am sympathetic to the general argument that facts and values are intimately commingled, there is an overtone to Bill's post that disturbs me. First, of course, the issue is rarely the "true" explanation of anything. What we want are "better" explanations in the sense of consistency with "the facts" (gasp), occam-ness, usefulness for the purposes we have in mind, aha-ness and related nebulous criteria. And in this context facts are not independent elements. Yet I am not happy with the implication that we must have some sort of empirical nonagression pact with the neoclassicals. Not only should consistency with the facts matter on a theoretical level, I think we would be crazy to abandon this commitment in practice. One of the main reasons I am skeptical of neoclassical theory is that, in my view, they do a *terrible* job of explaining the facts. The facts (the stuff you find in Doug Henwood's wonderful newsletter, for instance, or all the evidence I collected for my book on occupational safety and health, for another) are on our side. We should not run away from this. Peter Dorman
Notice about trade info services
Dear PEN-L subscribers: The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy offers a number of electronic mailing lists on trade issues. These are: TRADE-NEWS (includes weekly bulletins: NAFTA Monitor, Trade Week and GATT Alert), TRADE-LIBRARY (a storehouse of trade related documents) and TRADE-STRATEGY (a discussion of trade issues). To subscribe to any of these lists, send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] In the body of the message (not in the subject line) write: subscribe LISTNAME For example, if you wanted to add yourself to TRADE-NEWS, you'd send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]: subscribe TRADE-NEWS You can subscribe to all three lists by sending one message: subscribe TRADE-NEWS subscribe TRADE-STRATEGY subscribe TRADE-LIBRARY If you have further questions, send email to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I have enclosed the latest issue of Trade Week. Enjoy! Kai Mander Communications Director Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) 1313 5th St., SE, Suite 303 Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546 USA Tel: (612) 379-5980 Fax: (612) 379-5982 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Trade Week in Review and Resources Friday, June 17, 1994 Volume 3, Number 24 Headlines: CLINTON TO SUBMIT GATT BILL SOVEREIGNTY QUESTIONS RAISED OVER WTO GATT HOLDS TRADE, ENVIRONMENT MEETINGS SUTHERLAND PRESSES FOR EU PASSAGE OF WTO GERMANY, SWITZERLAND BATTLE FOR WTO HEADQUARTERS RESOURCES _ GATT NEWS SUMMARY _ CLINTON TO SUBMIT GATT BILL President Bill Clinton is expected to submit GATT implementing legislation to Congress within the next week. Representative Robert Matsui (D-California), acting chair of the House Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee, said he expects to receive draft legislation by Monday. Matsui said the subcommittee would then begin discussion of outstanding issues, including anti-dumping and fast track negotiating authority. A White House official said Budget Director Leon Panetta and others have almost finalized a GATT financing plan that Republicans would support. The White House has been struggling to find ways to recover the lost federal revenues resulting from GATT's lower tariffs. The Congressional Budget Office has lowered its estimates of how much money needs to be found to pay for GATT. The new figures show Congress will need to find $10 billion to pay for the pact's first five years, down from earlier estimates of as much as $14 billion. Ways and Means Health Subcommitee Chair Pete Stark (D-California) suggested GATT legislation receive a waiver from current budget rules requiring Congress to offset any lost tariff revenues with new taxes or program cuts. Stark said health care benefits should receive a similar waiver. Sources: "President Will Transmit GATT Bill to Congress Next Week With Financing," BNA DAILY REPORT, June 15, 1994; "Matsui Outlines Plan for Considering GATT Legislation," CONGRESSDAILY, June 14, 1994; "Stark Suggests Budget Waiver for GATT and Health Care," CONGRESSDAILY, June 14, 1994; Howard Banks, "Zero-Sum Thinking on GATT," FORBES, June 20, 1994; David Wessel, Bob Davis, "Cost Estimate for Trade Pact Lowered, Raising Chances for Approval in 1994, WALL STREET JOURNAL, June 15, 1994. _ SOVEREIGNTY QUESTIONS RAISED OVER WTO During a hearing June 14, Senators Jesse Helms (R-North Carolina), John F. Kerry (D-Massachusetts) and other members of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee speculated that the new World Trade Organization could undermine U.S. sovereignty. The WTO "takes away the ability of the United States to veto bad decisions," Helms said. "One could refer to this new organization as a 'U.N. of world trade, without the veto.'" Defending the trade agreement, Deputy Trade Representative Rufus H. Yerxa said the WTO would actually enhance U.S. sovereignty and claimed the U.S. would retain its ability to take unilateral action against other countries under Super 301 trade law. Consumer advocate Ralph Nader said the White House was creating "a kind of illusion" of a trade pact that the U.S. would not have to adhere to but which could be used against other countries. Nader said the WTO would have the power to threaten U.S. health, safety and environmental standards. Speaking earlier in the week at a news conference organized by the U.S. Business and Industrial Council's "Save Our Sovereignty" project, Nader said, "Decision- making power now in the hands of citizens and their elected representatives would be seriously constrained by a bureaucracy and a dispute resolution body located in Geneva, Switzerland." Sources: "Senators Criticize Proposed WTO as Industry Lobbies Undecided Members," BNA, June 15, 1994; "Testimony of Senator Jesse Helms," June 14, 1994; David Briscoe, "Illusion or Reality: GATT Weak
Re: downsizing and performance related pay
While in the first year there may be charges to the profit and loss account which reduce profits in the next years the effect of sharply lowered expenses on profits produces an upward trend in profits for which top managers should be rewarded, n-est-ce pas? Treacy: Non! If the reduction in costs also costs loss in sales their may be no performance bonus. In some outfits that go for big cuts, the customers leave in droves. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Instead of everyone taking in everyone else's laundry, the new economy is everyone firing everyone below them on the totem pole which produces productivity increases that need to be rewarded. The last one left get's it all. Penny Ciancanelli Manchester UK
Re: Facts Values
I don't think bill mitchell is running from the facts. After all, he *is* a practicing econometrician (and is proud to admit it). in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
Re: quote of the day
Dear Bruce the "facts" about the aussie federation is that it is heavily dominated by two major parties, loosely the conservatives (liberals - who are pretty right right now but used to be a sort of neoclassical synthesis sort of party) and the non-conservatives (labour party - who are historically the political arm of the trade union movement and used to embrace socialism and nationalisation, but who are now on the right too, and full of middle class educated types who eschew the worst features of new right rationalism) because of the preferential system for the lower house, it is virtually impossible for anyone from a small party to get a seat there and it is the legislature - the senate being a house of review with little legislative agenda. there are rare times when independents get a lower house seat but when they do they are virtually irrelevant to the legislative program. it is a common sentiment that a vote for an independent is a waste of vote. there have been notable times when in the distribution of preferences though the votes going to minority parties or individuals have had an effect in the outcome. two notable examples: 1961 - the conservative liberals (who were in power for 23 years in total post war up until 1972) won the election by one seat after receiving, rather perversely, communist party preferences. this is depsite the "fact" that the liberals had in the late 40s and early 50s tried to declare the communist party illegal without success. the period 1954-1973 - was marked by a split in the labour party between the anti-communist roman catholics (who formed the democratic labour party and paraded on the "reds under the bed" banner) and hte non-roman catholic wing of the trade union movement (the australian labour party). the split meant that the ALP could never win power in the lower house depsite getting close to 50 per cent of the vote consistently overall. the DLP lost favour as the church lost relevance in the 1970s. the only way a minority party/individual can have an influence is in the upper house and there are notable cases here which i have written about here before (viz 1975). the influence of these small groups tends to wane after a small period, although there is some sentiment that there has been a change in voter sentiment away from the 2 major parties. i doubt it. they have little funds and with TV being the way to get the political message across they do not really stand a chance. kind regards bill *** William F. MitchellTelephone: +61-49-215027 .-_|\ Department of Economics +61-49-705133 / \about The University of NewcastleFax: +61-49-216919 \.--._/*-- here Callaghan NSW 2308v Australia Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: PROUT
Well, PROUT rhymes with TROUT which reminds me of CARP (fish-wise), a Moonie (Unification Church) student auxialliary that used to haunt campuses when I was an undergrad in the late 70s/early 80s. Around the same time EST (I think) had something called the Hunger Project which attracted well-meaning students (including me, for one meeting) but whose entire program for feeding the starving was summed up thus: if people believe that hunger will end, then it will end. PROUT was around back then, too, so I don't think former CPSU members have anything to do with it. As far as I can tell it's just another cult/guru thing aimed at capturing confused people who have a modicum of social awareness. The idea that there are spiritual vultures out there hoping to deflect idealistic young students (or whoever) from a life of political action to a life of New Age-y self-contemplation makes me rather angry. I'd much rather they be deflected into becoming progressive economists :). Michael
Re: PROUT
I don't think PROUT is Moonie at all. However, it's vaguely cultish or sectarian (choose your word) and Ravi Batra is one of their folks (whose leader is P.R. Sarkar). Of course, one can't put down a theory simply because nuts like Batra like it; after all, nuts like Stalin identified themselves as "Marxists." Batra (in his book THE GREAT DEPRESSION OF 1990) says that Prout is an acronym for PROgressive Utilization Theory (p. 183). He then sketches the "basic outline of the Prout-based reforms which would given rise to a free enterprise society which possesses the attributes of such an ideal society." It's a kind of social democracy. Prout fishing in America? Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
Re: On Adam Smith
Just testing folks! Cheers, Ajit Sinha Original message Ajit, what kind of system do you have that makes linking up with pen-l such a pain?? in pen-l solidarity, Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED] Econ. Dept., Loyola Marymount Univ., Los Angeles, CA 90045-2699 USA 310/338-2948 (daytime, during workweek); FAX: 310/338-1950
Testing
Another testing folks! I'm very very sorry for this annoyance. Ajit
