[PEN-L:33284] Re: Re: Re: RE: Re: The Economist considers Karl Marx

["Ian Murray" <seamus2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carrol Cox" <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>

> > Well, since we have no idea as to what is non-natural, we can chalk
that
> > up to insufficient attention to language.
>
> "Natural" takes up about 14 columns in the OED. I don't think we can
> ground ths argument in linguistics or semantics.
>
> I didn't pry into those 14 columns, but I bet they contain abundant
> (respectable) sanction for the linguistic acceptability of the
> proposition that "Markets are natural."
>
> Carrol
===================

Which renders such statements totally innocuous and beside the point.
"Government is natural." "Space flight is natural." "Bowling is
natural."


Ian