ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Academic Blogs -> Legal Theory Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Academic

: Legal Theory Blog

Lipshaw on the "Failure" of Capitalism

By Lawrence Solum

ADVERTISEMENTS
Jeffrey M. Lipshaw (Suffolk University Law School) has posted Capitalism Didn't Fail, But the Metaphors Got a ?C? (Minnesota Law Review, Forthcoming) on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
    This is a paper for the Minnesota Law Review's October 15, 2010 symposium, "Government Ethics and Bailouts: Past, Present, and Future." The panel topic is "The Past: Did Capitalism Fail?" The paper addresses not the merits and demerits of modern global financial systems, but instead how those of us who are not financial professionals might make sense of them, particularly when they are in catastrophic mode. The thesis is that the question itself reveals the extent to which the financial crisis has not been so much about whether an economic system succeeds or fails, but the meaning human beings draw from natural and man-made catastrophes. When the world discombobulates our sense of order, our expectations of cause-and-effect, we seem either (a) to question our most fundamental assumptions about science, progress, and social order, or (b) to look for someone to blame.

    The paper considers whether the verb "fail" in the question is transitive or intransitive. Is the question whether capitalism failed intransitively, as in "died," or is whether capitalism failed transitively, as in "flunked the test"? I argue that the question itself, in syntax and meaning, reveals our ambivalent relationship with telos, the extent to which order and regularity in nature and human affairs reflect purposes or ends. Relying on Steven Pinker's insights about verb usage, I tie the ambivalent syntax of the question to its equivalent ambivalent meaning in connection with the financial crisis itself. In the frame of the atelic (or intransitive) metaphor, capitalism failed in the sense of getting sick or dying, and the real problem was the perception that the professionals did not know how to cure the patient. In the frame of the telic (or transitive) metaphor, a well-engineered modern society hums along smoothly, operated and regulated by well-trained professionals. In that case, either the machine or its operators failed our expectations. I conclude by suggesting that if we understand the source of the metaphoric frames themselves, we may not solve the financial crisis, but we may be able to calm the troubled waters of our fundamental assumptions and our concomitant desire to find human or divine villains to blame.

Full post as published by Legal Theory Blog on September 10, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0031 secs (from cache 11/05/26 16:47:54)