[lit-ideas] Re: The continuation of Realpolitik -- a counterfactual
- From: Robert Paul <rpaul@xxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 20:08:34 -0700
Irene wrote
Depending on the restriction, this may be a slippery slope argument. It
does describe Guantanamo. Bill Moyers wrote a new book on the state of
our democracy today. Needless to say, it's not healthy.
If this was meant as a reply to what I wrote to the other fellow, I fail
to see how touches on what I said. You write, quoting me
...if some people are 'restricted' in some way, some of the
time, it follows that all of the people may be 'restricted' in any way
at any time.
This is not all I wrote though. I said that if I understood the other
guy he seemed to be arguing this way, that is, that 'if some of the
people...then...all of the people...,' etc. I said that this was a bad
form of reasoning, for it simply doesn't follow that if there are laws
against embezzlement, or child abuse, or stealing peoples' wallets, that
someone, perhaps the government, has a 'right' to steal milk from my
refrigerator. Where no actual examples of anything are given, not only
does the imagination run riot, but the brain soon tires of the
discussion. So here I leave, and commend the subject to others.
Robert Paul
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
