Greebo Posted May 31, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 31, 2012 Your article states the RISKS of regulation. I agree fully with it. There is always the RISK that a regulation will yield more regulation. That is not why regulations are immoral. Regulations are immoral because they nullify the judgment of the individual. You are committing the fallacy of over-generalization and now you cannot defend it, so you're resorting to ad-hominem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hairnet Posted May 31, 2012 Report Share Posted May 31, 2012 (edited) Your article states the RISKS of regulation. I agree fully with it. There is always the RISK that a regulation will yield more regulation. That is not why regulations are immoral. Regulations are immoral because they nullify the judgment of the individual. You are committing the fallacy of over-generalization and now you cannot defend it, so you're resorting to ad-hominem. Really? Where did I say or imply that you arguments were invalid because of who or what you are? I never said such a thing, Just because you feel insulted or personally attacked does not mean that I intended you to believe that you are wrong in your argument. It seems as though you don't understand what the logical fallacies are. I would have to have said "Greebo, you are obtuse, there for you are wrong". I am saying, "Greebo, quit being obtuse". I basically already said that earlier when I refereed to the fact that giving the government the right to judge and predict what a person might do leads to absurdity. So yes, nullifying individual judgement leads to "risk", just like swallowing poison has "risks". Keep in mind that I am not talking about one specific regulation leading to another specific regulation, I am talking about the precedent of it leading to more absurd regulations. As explained in the article, government corruption and mob hysteria will lead this into absurdity. As it has, with every government on the planet. So considering that not only we have empirical evidence, and a theoretical frame work explaining the specific causes of what we see. I don't see how I am over generalizing. Edited May 31, 2012 by Hairnet Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.