Quote:
Originally Posted by tompe
What is classic.
I think you totally misunderstand the point. The point is not a point about quality of books. The point is an observation about different ways to sell books and different requierement on the production of books. There is no true scotsman fallacy here.
|
But it is:
Quote:
Originally Posted by pwalker8
Disconnect? Not really. It seems obvious to me that what the authors mean is that books are not consumer goods from the stand point that people do not go out and buy generic books.
|
As you can see the statement above would make no sense if you would replace "generic book" with simply "book". So he does say, that
some books are consumer goods, but
real books are not. Maybe you can make such distinctions without falling in a fallacy. But in this context, it is evasive. To discuss further with him, we must accept his distinction. We do not use the word "book" in its normal use anymore, but this restricted use.
There are other problems with his statement, for example, that just because something has a brand name it is still a consumer good. But it is not even necessary to talk about that, because of the fallacy.