On Sun, 22 Apr 2001, Richard Fiero wrote:
> James A. Donald wrote:
> > . . .
> >You are implying that libertarian analysis is unscientific and not
> >academically respectable. But much of it, most famously that by David
> >Friedman, is as hard core as anyone would wish, and on certain topics, it
> >is a lot more hard core than most universities would prefer.
>
> Oh, what science is that? Economics is not a science. It's more
> a branch of logic and I suspect that anyone who has actually
> read David Friedman would most likely never mention "science."
I've been reading his drivel since his first book in the 70's (when I was
in high school). 'Science' shouldn't be used in the same sentence as
'Economics', 'Organized Gambling' is a more apt term.
Then again, I've yet to find a single economics text that I don't find a
plethora of issues with. However, I strongly(!) recomend that you read his
and others work, with a critical (ie analyze the hell out of it) view. At
least you'll know what the arguments are (a hell of a lot clearer than
reading some Vinge or Heinlen book).
One of my favorites is the fundamental example of the "Gentleman and his
maid who wants a raise"...
____________________________________________________________________
The solution lies in the heart of humankind.
Chris Lawson
The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate
Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087
-====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
--------------------------------------------------------------------
