1. Is the point of Buridan's Ass to show that a philosophical/logical argument is absurd and can be rejected, as in "if what you say is true, then we'd have a case of Buridan's Ass, thus your argument must be wrong!"? If so, then
2. If we suppose that Jean, let's say, has intransitive preferences, does that imply that he is like Buridan's Ass when asked to consume one of three or more goods? (Instead of starving because he can't decide between two equally good meals, he starves because any meal he may choose is ALWAYS inferior to at least one other.) If so, then 3. Can we reject out of hand intransitivity as a source of irrationality? Please comment or clarify as you may be able to. Best wishes, jsh __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience http://launch.yahoo.com
