4 ms·
> There's also a distinct assertion on what must happen going forward, to the opinion of the speakers. I just went back and re-read the article. And... no, I
by newacct583 6y ago
> There's also a distinct assertion on what must happen going forward, to the opinion of the speakers.
I just went back and re-read the article. And... no, I don't see that at all. The tenor of the thing is almost 100% empirical, describing change without advocating for it. (To be fair this is largely a "book review" kind of thing and I haven't read the book itself.)
Politics really has infused everything now. Is it really not possible for you to read a straightforward description of urban growth patterns without seeing a... I dunno, I guess agenda-driven plot against your way of life? You do realize you can't vote your way back to unrestricted suburban growth, right? There just isn't the space for it.
- IG_Semmelweiss 6y agoTruth is in the eye of the beholder. Is it possible that there's a possibility that in fact, your assumptions could be wrong ? For an article that is 100% empirical as you say, i hardly see any citations, like user theNJR OP said. Take for example my "way of life". How would you react if i told you that I am a resident of a major urban center of +2M people ? And I have lived in such a city all my life ,including my formative years ? Would you still hold on to your truth ?
- newacct583 6y ago> Truth is in the eye of the beholder. It literally is not. > For an article that is 100% empirical as you say, i hardly see any citations ... it's an INTERVIEW. With the AUTHORS. Literally almost the whole thing, beyond the 3-4 paragraph introduction, is a "citation" of expert evidence.