In his day Enoch Powell was often lauded as highly logical, although the conclusions and the positions he took were often markedly at odds with reality. Logic is however a dangerous tool. The old acronym GIGO [Garbage in, garbage out) applies to its use every bit as much as to computer programming.
I was reminded of Powell when I read the rather nasty post by David Carr (on Samizdata.net) to which I have already made reference. There is the same rigorous progress to a logical conclusion from preposterous starting points. Powell was of course not always wrong, but his pursuit of logical rigour at the expense of rationality led him to some bizarre places.
Powell was not the first or the last politician to be caught between the concept and the act, the purity of the idea and the twist and turns of real life, but in his case the gift for abstraction was so advanced that the gap yawned wider than for most. This created in him a sense of danger, a tension that communicated which was more than his argument always did. As a speaker in the Commons he often seemed to deploy a fiercely private logic, yet his carefully articulated, pedantic performances could make irrelevance sound prophetic. Few could always remember what he said, but they were always impressed by the intensity with which he said it.
Norman Shrapnel
The comments on Carr's post are, with some exceptions, in the same vein but are worth reading nevertheless as a warning of that gap between 'the purity of the idea and real life'. (In a couple of cases the comments are so far adrift from reality that I wonder how the writers ever find their way to the front door.)
