4 ms·
It's not, inherently fallacious. It may be counter-intuitive to you, but that is by no means a fallacy.
by crusso 12y ago
It's not, inherently fallacious. It may be counter-intuitive to you, but that is by no means a fallacy.
- sitkack 12y agoIt really is, what if <thing is better>? There is nothing to argue against. So like I said, I would change my mind, statistically, in the long run, towards the better thing. Still fallacious.
- crusso 12y agoYou stated: "There is an inherent moral flaw in having exclusive licensing over life saving technology." I simply asked you to consider for the sake of argument that more lives may be saved under an exclusive licensing framework. How is that an "inherent moral flaw"? It certainly isn't "inherently fallacious". Neither one of us has numbers that statistically validate things in either direction - but I'm not closing my mind off to reasonable possibilities.