[lit-ideas] Re: Lawyer Creates Infinite Circular Argument
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 20 May 2006 13:16:49 +0100 (BST)
--- Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Donal: I may perhaps point out: suing yourself has little or
> nothing to do with infinite circular arguments.
>
> Even if you assume unlimited legal fees and courtroom time
> and a willingness to pursue both sides of the issue with
> unmitigated fervor?
Yes, even if. 'Infinite circularity' is a logical property of an argument.
Charging unlimited fees and pursuing both sides of an issue are behaviours of
a human being that need not lead to any infinite regress or circularity, and
as behaviours they are not the logical property of any argument qua argument.
That said, of course suing yourself, and only yourself, seems generally not
worthwhile since all your costs, damages etc would be paid by yourself even
if you win: and there is in general no obligation to sue oneself for harm we
have done ourselves, nevermind harm we have done to other people. What may
happen is that a person acting in one capacity takes part in proceedings
against or involving themselves in another capacity - they may even be
obliged to do so.
Donal
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
