SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (John C. Médaille)
Date:
Fri Jun 13 15:03:55 2008
In-Reply-To:
Message-ID:
References:
<30505235.30781213194596466.JavaMail.servlet@perfora> <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
Dear Mohammad,

It seems to me that the bulk of your post deals 
not with economics per se, but with philosophy 
and physics. Now, you may be that you are right 
about all of this, but if you are, then the 
philosophers and physicists are all wrong, or, as 
you term it, "superstitious." Further, among 
philosophers and physicists, these are matters of 
settled opinion, not often controverted. Again, 
you may be right to controvert them, but it seems 
to me that it requires stronger arguments than 
what you have offered. And your disagreements 
with the philosophers starts with the very title of your post.


John C. M?daille

ATOM RSS1 RSS2