3 ms·
It is an argument from ad hominem. Or are economists wrong even when they say something you'd agree with?
by jackvalentine 8y ago
It is an argument from ad hominem. Or are economists wrong even when they say something you'd agree with?
- cheez 8y agoThe semantics of the philosophy of the argument are irrelevant. The basic point is that predictive economists are nothing more than highly educated charlatans.
- jackvalentine 8y agoYou’re very keen on pushing that point.
- Erlich_Bachman 8y agoThe original comment ("In theory, yes. In practice, no.") is from ad hominem. It does not provide any actual thoughts or arguments, it simply says that there is an economist that thinks this way, implying that it should be enough of a reason to trust it. There was no argument except for ad hominem! Of course the response to that can only be a defusal of such argument.
- jackvalentine 8y agoErr did you click on to the link provided with that comment at all?