Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Hmmm. Do you think that a paper entitled "Against Intellectual Monopoly" is going to give a fair and balanced view, or that it perhaps might start out with an entrenched position on the subject?
|
Irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not the arguments sound/cogent. If the relevant facts are being fabricated or twisted such that the truth value of the premises of the arguments become false then that is relevant (but we do not start with that assumption). If the conclusions do not in fact follow from the premises (whether on the basis of probability or deduction) then that is relevant. The fact that the authors have used the conclusion of their arguments as their title is not relevant, though it probably makes for good marketing in this case. This a discussion about a divisive issue, not a survey course in economics. I don't see how 'fair and balanced' is an applicable criterion.
To put it another way: if we were discussing Ma Teresa and I were to reference Chris Hitchens' expose of her, it would not do to say "But Hitchens is biased!" Of course he is. But that is not the question. The question is whether the facts about Ma Teresa are as he states them and whether his conclusions follow from these facts.