Draggingtree Posted August 15, 2015 Share Posted August 15, 2015 Logic and the Rudeness RebuttalAUGUST 14, 2015 Gary Galles One of the trickiest needles for libertarians to thread in public policy discussions is what I call the rudeness rebuttal. And today’s explosion in microaggression accusations just makes it trickier. The rudeness rebuttal arises from logic. The logical structure of an argument is from premises to conclusions—A implies B implies C…implies Z. Correctly structured, if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. However, if a premise or step in an argument is false, factually or logically (e.g., involves a self-contradiction), even if every succeeding step is logically valid, the conclusion need not hold. This is particularly important when the pivotal step involves the exact reverse of the truth, which can not only invalidate the conclusion, but confirm the opposite conclusion. That is, while A may imply Z, not-A may exclude Z from possibility). For example, something like “capitalism is survival of the fittest” is a common part of statist attacks on freedom. It is false. However, it often characterizes government actions. Consequently, survival of the fittest arguments point to government as worsening any such problem, not solving it, as they conclude. https://mises.org/blog/logic-and-rudeness-rebuttal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts