happiness Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 During a debate about the merits of Objectivism and laissez-faire, a Rand hater cites something bad that happened in the context of today's mixed economy as evidence of a flaw in capitalism. What is the exact error there in terms of the person's logic? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reidy Posted October 11, 2014 Report Share Posted October 11, 2014 This varies from case to case. The error is at least as likely to be one of economics or history as of logic. It might be the error post hoc ergo propter hoc. We observe that one event followed on another and infer, illegitimately, that the later happened because of the earlier. For example some have observed that the real-estate collapse a few years ago followed a lot of subprime lending by nominally private (though regulated) lenders. You can always point out, easily, that the industry was regulated and that the conclusion doesn't follow straightforwardly. The more information you have, the stronger your case will be. If you get into conversations like this frequently, read up on the various controversies. For the real-estate collapse you might look into Sowell's The Housing Boom and Bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A is A Posted October 14, 2014 Report Share Posted October 14, 2014 What was the example? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 (edited) It simply sounds like the straw man fallacy to me but that might not be exact. You are arguing for laissez-faire and they are attacking a mixed economies failures. The attack doesn't follow logically because what they are arguing against is not what you are arguing for. And in this context the statist components of the mixed economy is most likely the cause of what they are claiming is a flaw in a laissez-faire political system. You are defending a blue system, while they are attempting to defend a yellow system by attacking a very light green system. In other words, the components that make up the light green system are a majority of the yellow system they are attempting to defend. But to attack your pure blue system their attack is on the light green hybrid which is overwhelmingly yellow. Edited October 16, 2014 by EC 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.