[PEN-L:1849] Re: Fwd: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Re: Redutio ad Absurdum

[Jim Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 02:58 PM 12/22/98 EST, you wrote:
>No, unlike Bill's, my apology is sincere and as for close to Bill's, well you
>know the rest..."close but no cigar".
>
>But you know, reductio ad absurdum/nauseum as a instrument of rhetoric and
>reasoning does not so much suggest analogy as to expore the inner and perhaps
>hidden nature and consequences of a thing by extrapolating the inexorable or
>likely consequences if given "principles", "axioms" and "concepts" are
>consistently and universally applied. That is the spirit in which it is used
>rather than to suggest that the nazis were holding seminars and praticums on
>Walras, Pareto or even Hayek to construct marginalist calculations and
general
>"equilibria" schemes and orders.

slippery-slope stories only go so far.

>But I really did like Wotjek's comments and about the  illusions of "choice".

I too thought that his historical analysis was useful.


Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx &
http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html