From: Charles Hixson (charleshixsn@earthlink.net)
Date: Sat Oct 26 2002 - 13:01:46 MDT
On Saturday 26 October 2002 10:36, Steve Davies wrote:
> Lee said
>...
> Neither is a subset of the other since they are terms from different
> disciplines. "Oxymoron" is a term from rhetoric and is the name for a
> specific trope i.e. a way of using or combining words to create an effect
> in the mind of the listener (in this case to get their attention and make
> them think). "Contradiction in terms" comes from logic and the theory of
> definitions. In pure form it's "An a not a" where A and Not A are combined
> in a single definition or premiss. To argue that a concept such as
> "anarcho-capitalism" is a CIT is a lazy way out since it depends on
> definitions to work rather than empirical evidence or deduction. It also
> enables you to avoid empirical responses by simply reiterating your
> definitional argument. In this case there is ample empirical evidence that
> property can exist as an institution in the absence of what we would
> normally call a state.
> Steve Davies
Worse. It depends on a shared definition of a term that doesn't seem to have
a well-formed definition. It's always being defined by exemplar (frequently
a lousy one). The times that I have gotten close to getting a definition, it
has always seemed to imply things that we wouldn't really want the definition
of capitalism to imply. (Or of socialism. You can say exactly the same
about it.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:48 MST