http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2004/03/born_to_sue.html

When an argument is coercively-enforced by the legal system (or indeed by any form of coercion: political, managerial, media or mob), it is not science.

Indeed, in such a sitation science is impossible.

As Lewis notes himself, That Hideous Strength is a fictionalized version of the essay The Abolition of Man, which is also on line.

Ironic that a Stalinist could make such an accusation. And instructive that Haldane’s reputation among liberals has not suffered because of his advocacy for evil.

Thank you very much for a fascinating post.

In his study of decision-making, Prof Dietrich Doerner ran a simulation of the job of fire chier (for fighting forest fires.) He found that subjects who applied rigid, context-insensitive rules…such as “always keep the units widely deployed” or “always keep the units concentrated”…tended to fail at the game.

In another experiment, dealing with a simulated clothing factory, the unsuccessful “factory managers” tended to use unqualified expressions: constantly, every time, without exception, absolutely, etc…while the successful ones tended toward qualified expressions: now and then, in general, specifically, perhaps,…

My review of Doerner’s book is here.

“Being a democrat, I am opposed to all very drastic and
sudden changes of society (in whatever direction)…”

The definition of “democrat” has flipped 180 degrees in 60 years.

I especially note, in the passages quoted above: “A political programme can never in reality be more than probably right.” Lewis was a second-born, three years younger than his brother. Later-borns are famously more accepting of probabilistic worldviews. Haldane was a firstborn who clung to Communism long after the democides in the Soviet Union became public knowledge in the West.