D. M. Armstrong - Climate Skeptic

Whilst I find his naturalism unconvincing, David Armstrong is an impressive philosopher. He is probably the singularly most influential philosopher that Australia has produced and that is no mean feat. He is one of the few philosophers responsible for the new birth in metaphysics over the last few decades. And his naturalism didn’t prejudice him from a robust engagement with many of the more traditional categories in metaphysics, which one could say, present at least a prima facie difficulty for a worldvew like his. He maintained a thoroughly realist – but naturalized – view of universals and his world was a world of nothing but states of affairs.

Stephen Mumford, in his book on Armstrong’s philosophy, says that he baulked at the prospect of becoming a disciple of his philosophical mentor, John Anderson. Anderson was not unimpressive himself and Armstrong learnt a lot from him, but such was his doggedly independence that he was to be no man’s intellectual servant. Here is an Armstrong quote from Mumford’s book

I am not a natural disciple, and, although I was immensely influenced, I never became one of the loyal circle. This caused Anderson to regard me with suspicion. (15)

Armstrong would have none of the kind of group think that pervades much of the academy today. He was also prominent in opposing the Marxist and Postmodernist takeovers of Sydney University some decades ago. So it doesn’t surprise me that he is also a climate skeptic and at least recognizes the strength of some of the Intelligent Design arguments.

His review of James Franklin’s Science and Its Limits he says this on climate change in parenthesis

(I have just now been reading Ian Plimer’s newly appeared book Heaven + Earth, which seems to show that the case for the global warming hypothesis is very weak indeed.)

And on evolution and ID he says

I had the good fortune some years ago to hear Behe talk, at a symposium on evolution at the University of Notre Dame. I thought at the time that Darwinians were lucky to have such an informed and resourceful critic as Behe. Let the chips fall where they may. I’d myself look for some naturalistic explanation for the whole process of evolution, but let us not regard the case as closed.

In saner times such comments wouldn’t warrant a mention but if one is even slightly acquainted with the extreme dogmatism and group think that confronts proponents of both ID and climate skepticism then such an open position, especially from such a prominent intellectual like Armstrong, is a breath of fresh air. 

(See also his review of John Armstrong's The Meaning of Civilisation)

Strong Currencies

According to the great economist Ludwig von Mises a strong currency is not the dire situation that many assume. The most common worry is that a strong currency means exports are more expensive and less competitive on the world market. But the blessings of a weak currency are over sold. First of all, one of the surest routes to a weak currency is for the federal reserve to print money. This is happening all over the world at the moment as nations compete to debase their currency. The most egregious examples are the US and Japanese.

As this piece from The Drum (ABC) points out, Australia will be a 'victim' in this currency war because its dollar will appreciate greatly leading some overseas investors to recommend shorting the US dollar by buying AUD. But as The Drum piece notes our own Federal Reserve is under the false impression that a rising dollar is a bad thing - no doubt because it thinks our exports will suffer - so it is compensating by trying to pump air into our already overinflated and overpriced housing market.

But as this news piece reports, a stronger currency carries certain blessings such as keeping the price of food low.

Despite persistent complaints about the ever-increasing cost of living, Australia now has the developed world's fastest falling food prices, according to new research.

Food costs dropped 2.7 percent in the 12 months leading up to September, analysis of OECD data has found.

The falling prices are a dramatic turnaround after Australians suffered the fastest-rising food prices of the world's developed nations between 2000 and 2009.

The change could be attributed to fruit prices, which recently normalised after surging prices due to natural disasters in Queensland and Victoria.

But broader trends also contributed to the drop, with Australian food prices remaining contained compared to countries such as New Zealand, the UK and the US since the end of 2009.

University of Queensland economics professor John Quiggin said the reversal in prices was partly due to increased supply at the end of the drought and the strong Australian dollar.

"The appreciation of the dollar pushes down the prices of commodities, which pushes down the price for Australian consumers," Professor Quiggin said.

A strong currency also keeps other commodities low, like fuel. 

Now for some basic economics. As von Mises pointed out many years ago, a strong currency doesn't necessarily make exports more expensive because a weakening currency is caused by inflating the money supply and hence drives up the cost of domestically made goods. From what I understand, this is because the cost of imported raw materials go up because of the weaker dollar and this makes the goods more expensive and hence offsets any advantage that the weaker dollar may have had against other currencies.

Japan and the US are two test cases. Whilst the US has debased its currency over recent years without hardly any improvement in its terms of trade, the Japanese Yen has been appreciating whilst its exports haven't suffered at all.

In this regard Japan provides an interesting case study. Despite decades of a strengthening yen, the domestic price level has remained stagnant. Deflation has more recently eroded the domestic price of goods in Japan. Foreigners, for their part, have to pay a higher price thanks to the appreciation of the yen. But they pay that higher price on fewer money units because of deflation. No harm, no foul, one might say.

Yet the effect goes further. Domestic Japanese producers have access to cheaper import markets. Located throughout a relatively small series of islands for one of the world's largest economies, Japan lacks many of the natural resources necessary to be a global powerhouse. A strong yen allows these producers cheap access to foreign resources, while maintaining their selling prices. Profits are strong as a result. Consumers benefit as well. Many Japanese are well-seasoned travelers, able to navigate the world, secure with their valuable yen. Japanese consumers are afforded a high quality of life — complete with great vacation pictures — thanks to the strong position they have in the world. This position is attributable to the yen.

If we want a good picture of the net effect of these two forces, we can turn our attention to the real exchange rate. Adjusted for the change in the Japanese price level versus the United States', the story of Japan's competitiveness becomes much more apparent.

Misogyny in India

To be a woman in India. Articles like this make a mockery of the multiculturalist idea that all cultures are the same and the feminist doctrine that women experience widespread misogyny and discrimination in western countries. Maybe such feministas like our own PM, with her pathetic misogyny speech, should learn something about the real thing.

What has often struck me is the difference between being a woman in Delhi and a woman in Melbourne. In India there is a constant feeling of insecurity that is almost oppressive.

You are hyper-aware, never speaking to anyone you don't know - particularly men - avoiding eye contact, taking the women's carriage on the Metro and dressing conservatively to blend in as much as possible. And yet in spite of all of these measures you are still never safe. There isn't one trip where an attack on a woman - often publicly, by a gang of men - is not reported in the media. But more devastating is the knowledge that thousands of women across India often experience similar behaviour without an outlet for assistance or justice.

In light of this experience, the recent gang-rape of a young female student on a bus in Delhi shocks but does not surprise me. In a country where women are silenced, and any harm done to them is seen as indicative of their own recklessness, men are able to act with impunity.

This unfortunately means that acts of violence become more aggressive. The media attention surrounding the recent tragedy has highlighted the pervasive misogyny that is present in contemporary India.

A politician called women ''painted and dented'' for protesting and alleged that ''rape victims'' were often prostitutes who were not paid.

Exposés of Delhi police show they believe women who come forward with rape accusations just ''cry wolf''. In any event, they are to blame for dressing immodestly and conducting themselves inappropriately, and in extreme cases victims have committed suicide after police harassment.

This apathy towards violence against women begins in the womb with female infanticide. With dowry deaths and child marriage so prevalent, India is regarded as the worst country in the G20 to be a woman.

Gary Johns

AMONG the world's biggest economies, infanticide, child marriage and slavery make India the worst place to be a woman.
In India, women and girls continue to be sold as chattels, married off as young as 10, burned alive as a result of dowry-related disputes and young girls are exploited and abused as domestic slave labour.

The numbers of missing women is highest in two northwestern states Punjab and Haryana (Siwan Anderson and Debraj Ray, Economic & Political Weekly, December 1, 2012) where attitudes to women are crudest.