| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Fwd: RE: [distributism] The Rabbit | | Date: | Wednesday, April 20, 2005 14:53:40 (+1000) | | From: | Vic Bridger <socred @.......au>
|
This is a good example of arguing with one who commences with a different
premise. It serves no purpose to discuss the A+B with anyone coming from an
orthodox standpoint. The test of any theorem including the A+B is whether or
not it reflects the facts. That is whether or not the conclusion is correct.
The A+B Theorem can stand on its own irrespective of what measurements are
used. The statement;
"Social Credit analysis - based on the A + B theorem
in the form of reductio ad absurdum - concludes there
is a defect in the system of accounting which
entrepreneurs use to measure the effectiveness of
their decisions that is not resolvable at the level
of the individual firm."
is evidence of poor logic and pre-conceived ideas. The reductio ad absurdum
applies to the writer of the statement. It is his opinion not supported with
any evidence. The conclusion referred to is utter tripe and indicates the
paucity in either understanding or lack of reading.
Vic Bridger
----- Original Message -----
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 8:40 AM
Subject: [socialcredit] Fwd: RE: [distributism] The Rabbit
>
> Note: forwarded message attached.
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> You're subscribed to this list with the email socred@ecn.net.au
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message