Quote:
Originally Posted by dickloraine
But it is:
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.
|
I really do not understand what you are talking about.
Are you saying that some books are not sold as generic books (commodity)? Are you saying that most books are not sold as non-commodity items? What are you arguing?