Fuzzy? Why fuzzy?
Well first, welcome everyone. Or anyone. We’ll see. This blog is thus the english-language unidentical twin of, you guessed it, Gauche floue. I consider myself, in fact, somewhat of a political left-winger, but it’s fuzzy. I’m also a liberal, in the political, philosophical, social and economic senses, but here also this is very fuzzy, for all sorts of reasons probably just as fuzzy. And I’m a Québécois, a Canadian, a North-American consumer with a judeo-christian background, and it would just get fuzzier if I went on.
Now, in my mother tongue at least, we speak of “artistic fuzziness” when we want to discredit a point of view as not being clear enough, but there’s nothing artistic here. I even believe, on the contrary, that fuzzy logic - yes, there is such a thing - is actually the best weapon there is against intellectual confusion and improvisation. It is rather, in my view, our over-simplification of the very idea of clarity which leads us much quicker to the worst logical mistakes. Because nothing requires that all things be either this, or either that. Most things are more like, a little this and a little that, yet this is what makes cogent distinctions so vulnerable to the pseudo-clarity offered by grossly exaggerated opposing perspectives, which are the bread and butter of what’s called demagoguery. The law of least effort doesn’t only apply to celestial bodies…
A little reminder, at this point, of the basic concept of fuzzy logic: the fuzzy set. The set of cats, in conventional logic, implies an unequivocal distinction between what is part of the set and what isn’t. It’s all or nothing, it’s a cat or a non-cat. No doubt, if it is one, you should, as we say in french, call a cat a cat (I wouldn’t bring you exactly where I’m going with a spade, as you’ll see). But what if it isn’t so clear that it’s a cat - should you forcefully deny this ambiguity? What if the set of cats was a fuzzy set? Isn’t a lion a cat, yet is it? A little? A lot? Completely? Not at all? Assign a probability between 0 and 1 to the fact that a lion is part of the set of cats, and you’ll have admitted that the lion can be a bit of a cat and a bit of a non-cat, depending on the context of a conversation, on the definitions implied by the speakers, and so on.
Here, I’m speaking of cats. We can agree that dilemmas of that kind can be easily clarified. But in this blog, I will want to discuss economic issues, ethics, politics, areas where, obviously, fuzzy concepts in this technical sense, abound literally everywhere. The ambiguities that such concepts can hide are a lot deeper and more complex than the mere confusions that natural languages will generate without much consequence, when it comes to domesticated felines for example. So there you have it. Fuzzy left. This is the perspective I intend to adopt, in a history of what we are that relies only on ourselves, without any hope for the helping hand of a God or a Nature that would have already decided what such a history should become, as is proclaimed by the right, again clearly or not. Yet this attempt can only be coherent, it seems to me, if it rejects outright any new paralysing metaphysics. We must renounce the false clarity of casual radicalism, and have the courage to search in the shade. I can be so full of myself sometimes… Then again, would I be blogging if I weren’t?
By the way, anyone remembers the joke about the economist who was looking for his keys under a streetlight? Well, some passer-by who just wanted to help asked to be shown exactly where the man thought he had lost them, and the economist gestured towards the end of an alley, far over there in the dark.
- ‘Cos here at least, he says to the incredulous passer-by, there is enough light to look for them…
Comments
Comment from Olaf
Date: November 25, 2006, 5:07 pm
Yvan,
Congrats on the new site! I’m happy to see that you’ve finally given in and signed your life away to this particular pastime.
I don’t know if you got my message at Paper Dynamite: I just saw your final response on the thread on Thursday, as I had given up after a few days waiting. My apologies if I left you hanging. Also, in my message at PD I had floated the idea that, if you would be interested and had the time, you might want to do a guest post at my place about these interesting developments in the Quebec nationalism chronicles. But I assume since you have this place, you’d likely post it here. In any case, I’m excited to see you’re all set up, and will be back often.
Comment from Peter Wrightwater
Date: November 25, 2006, 6:05 pm
Hi Yvan,
Congradulation! I just saw a referral to your site on my stats counter, and thought I’d come by and say hello. I’m very pleased you decided to take the plunge into the blogosphere. I hope it’s a positive experience for you. Welcome!
Comment from Yvan St-Pierre
Date: November 26, 2006, 8:45 am
Thanks guys! I sure hope I can contribute usefully to this latest new world. I’ll certainly be looking forward to exchange further ideas with the both of you on Canadian politics. I must say I feel a little overwhelmed with the current events, but the overall feeling is pretty good. Who knows, though, maybe it’s just overflow from my being really thrilled by Ségolène Royal’s real chance for french presidency? Back on all this on upcoming posts, obviously.
And Olaf, by the way, I read your response to my own belated one on Peter’s blog, and I like this idea of guest posting, which could be reciprocal eventually, that is if and when I can provide you with an audience. In fact, I’m trying to understand better the link between the “western alienation” theme and the strong Trudeauistic ethos of Western Canada, especially considering the Petro-Canada thing. I’m working with the hypothesis that westerners might be attracted to a sort of libertarian reading of Trudeau’s thinking. Maybe you could enlighten me on this at some point.
All in all, I really think I’m going to enjoy this. Thanks again to the both of you, and more power to blogging!
Comment from Olaf
Date: November 26, 2006, 12:37 pm
Hey Yvan,
Western Alienation is an interesting topic, and although I’m not particularly well read on the subject I would likely have at least a few insights based purely on my place of upbringing. Very generally, Albertans are quite attracted to Trudeau’s ideals of individual rights and especially provincial equality, however will never forgive the man for the NEP. For the most part, although I respect him personally, his name is dirt here.
In any case, I do not have a great deal of traffic by any means, however if you wanted to write a post from a Quebecois perspective on the recent developments of the past week, I’d be pleased to have it on my site, with a little blurb about your new blog, in the hopes of getting you a few readers off the bat. Although an unabashed conservative, I get quite a few reasonable left-leaning readers (and more reasonable conservative types) who would likely be interested in your site, and I in particular would be happy to hear your perspective on the recent events. Also, I have done surprisingly well in the CBA contest (http://cba.myblahg.com/), making it into the second round, and expect that my readership will increase by virtue of that.
Email me (olafraskolnikov@gmail.com) if you’d be interested in the guest post.
Write a comment, or trackback from your own site.