Has The Prudent Man Lost His Mind in Post-modern America?

    Amidst the buzzwords, bull-feke and innumerable” Powerpoint masterpiece” slides, you will find a kernel of indisputable truth in the Lean Six Sigma pile of pony poop. Take any process with random variation affix its mean result to an acceptable value and then limit variations to the point where they are miniscule. This will yield a consistent and reliable acceptable result that people can trust and store value in. It works best in the mechanized environment of the modern fabrication plant but it can be and has been applied to numerous environments across at least two centuries of history* with a reasonable likelihood of success. This was true because there was always an identifiable standard by which we could tell what right looked like.

    If you are fortunate enough to have read The Metaphysical Club** by Louis Menand, then you are well aware of one man’s attempt to apply a primitive version of Lean Six Sigma to Jurisprudential Thought. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes was heavily influenced by Charles Darwin’s Origin of The Species. In this book Darwin famously argues that natural variations occur in a random pattern from a pre-established mean and that the most suitable adaptations enable an organism to out-reproduce similar organisms with less effective mutations. Another influence on Holmes’ legal views was the outcome of an 1830 court case Harvard College vs Armory. This case was one of the first adjudicated through application of The Prudent Man Rule which roughly reads as stated below.

    Read More »

    I hope this doesn’t upset the moderators, but

    while reading the recent closed post on Creationism and truthers it occurred to me that the very existence of truthers is evidence against both Darwinism and Creationism. How could the stupidity gene possessed by truthers have survived? But how could creatures created in the image of God be so stupid? Birthers, being merely misguided, don’t contradict either. My head is spinning, but if you take | Read More »

    Liberals are anti-science: reading between the lines of intellectual bullying

    Promoted from the diaries by Neil Believe it or not, Salon.com has given a conservative the opportunity to fill their space. This weeks question in “Ask a Wingnut” gets to an important topic, one with implications far beyond the scope of the actual words. On the face of it, the Wingnut author does a good job answering the question: the Conservative record on science is | Read More »