Coming out of very good conversation at George’s with old friend and liberal Dick, I think of something I might have said, namely that I don’t have positions on everything and the positions I have range from certain to perplexed. Dick peppered me with qq about what I think about various issues. I think I did make the point that on this or that I have no more than leanings. Haven’t studied this one, nor that one, I said, and I think he got my point. But it’s an important one, that we ought to look before we leap and not be too facile in adopting and defending this or that.
I did mention what I’m reading (when he asked), namely Friederich Hayek on individualism, the good and the bad kind, British and Euro. More later on this.
He mentioned days long ago when we agreed on everything. But those were days when I did more leaping than looking, as a young priest teacher at St. Ignatius, for instance. But even then we probably had disagreements, and he was wrong to assume otherwise. This is it with people: if they agree wholly, there’s something wrong. It means they are buying too much and should put the brakes on conviction-forming. Anyhow, too much agreement makes for boring conversation, which mine with Dick wasn’t.