[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: