--
At 03:37 PM 4/27/2001 -0400, Faustine wrote:
> We should hold ourselves and our friends to HIGHER standards if we
> want to get somewhere in the long run.
You could start by holding yourself to the standard of actually having some
faint glimmering of knowledge about the research areas of those you
confidently proclaim are of insufficiently high standard.
> I don't know where you're getting this. How does asking for someone
> to point me to Friedman's best work turn into my not taking any
> libertarian economists seriously?
Such a request takes for granted that you are competent to judge and
understand Friedman's best work.
> So only after I produce a full-page review of The Problematics of
> Moral and Legal Theory do I have a right to say anything at all
> about David Friedman, huh.
If you actually knew anything about the field you criticize, you would know
that "the problematics of moral and legal theory" is largely irrelevant to it.
A more relevant criterion would be that only after you show you understand
Coase's "The problem of social cost" do you have the right to say anything
at all about any libertarian's knowledge of economics.
--digsig
James A. Donald
6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG
rLYPyxEQ+keCDleYXchKCNyZ3v0wJq1aO7HhDBo8
4ZMHPAQd4kdDR3J4Yxg8eeF9aqWTvFZb62KeUCGmB
-----------------------------------------------------
We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because
of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this
right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state.
http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
