2 ms·
Another academic indulging in nirvana fallacy + circular reasoning. "My argument would work if the whole world was different, therefore my argument is correct!
by 23B1 3y ago
Another academic indulging in nirvana fallacy + circular reasoning.
"My argument would work if the whole world was different, therefore my argument is correct!"
Or as I like to say
"If we had some ham, we could have ham and cheese sandwiches – if we had some cheese."
- the-smug-one 3y agoWithout the context of the article your comment makes sense. With the context of the article your comment makes no sense. What are you even saying?
- 23B1 3y agoSorry, I wrote "nirvana fantasy" and have corrected it to "nirvana fallacy" which should clarify my point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
- nico 3y agoA calculus professor I had used to tell a joke of some people trapped in a room and the mathematician would say “let’s assume we have the key, now we can use it to get out”
- hgs3 3y agoNirvana fallacy is only true when the argument is completely implausible, like "when humans sprout wings, we won't need airplanes anymore." However, the article is making the valid point that copyright is just a social construct. It is not something physical, like wings, and under a different culture and/or political system it might be unnecessary.
- 23B1 3y agoI'd be willing to make a long bet that we'll sprout wings before property ownership goes away.
- ouid 3y agoOh no, academics thinking about things. If we lived without copyright the world would be different because of it. Insisting that a world without copyright look exactly like our own is dishonest
- kelnos 3y agoI don't think anyone is arguing that the world wouldn't be different. The original author is arguing that the world would be better, but I don't think he successfully argues that. (And I personally do believe a no-copyright-at-all world would be worse than what we have now.)