-
Hello everyone, I am involved in an ongoing debate with a co-worker, and he has provided the following article for me to review: http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/keynes I am constructing a paragraph-by-paragraph response and would greatly appreciate any input. If you have any particular insights, suggestions, or arguments that I should include, please
-
[quote user="Physiocrat"] Can anybody provide refutations of my first post? [/quote] I believe I provided a criticism of Long's argument; unfortunately I am not sure I followed the rest of your argument. Can you restate it for my benefit?
-
[quote user="Physiocrat"] Talk about the non-existence of God you may as well talk about the non-existence of me. [/quote] In the interest of keeping this thread somewhat on topic (Mises's argument against omnipotent actors) and not letting it devolve into a theist-atheist debate, I will merely point out that the above is a statement of
-
[quote user="laminustacitus"] The "must" actually results from the limitations of man, and if God desires to communicate with man, which He must if he desires to help man, then he must come down to man's level - theology of the incarnation. [/quote] You're missing the point, and I don't know how I can be any more clear
-
[quote user="laminustacitus"] [God] must make himself known to man, and because man comprehends the world through action, then it would seem that God must communicate through action. [/quote] We're going in circles now. There is nothing that God "must" do. If he is omnipotent, all states are available to him directly with no
-
[quote user="laminustacitus"] God helps man to attain salvation. From the point of view of man it seems like an action, but man cannot understand the world outside of the category of action; ergo, it may very well be something else, but man still comprehends it as action. [/quote] The Bible is filled with examples of God "acting"
-
Laminustacitus, I still think you're missing the point of Mises's argument. Christian theology isn't going to help here, as it is the very basis of that theology that is under review. For an omnipotent being, the concept of ends and means does not apply. In other words, the statement that God "is willing to help man along the path of
-
What an intriguing topic. This train of thought is one of the primary reasons I became an atheist after being raised in a Christian home. Long before I read Human Action and was able to properly formulate the argument, it occurred to me that God could have created Heaven directly. When I discussed this with fellow Christians, they essentially used Long's
-
[quote user="Luna"] True, but I think we can make a good realistic scenario. Assuming banks wont lend because everyone is full of debt (companies, individuals,) Only govt can get into more debt and therefore, more govt intervention. What then?? what would Austrians predict in these circumstances??? [/quote] Unchecked money creation by the
-
Sure, there are a number of scenarios that can be predicted using Austrian thought. However, the specific outcome depends heavily on government and individual actions that are difficult to "predict" in any scientific sense of the word. Once you start trying to predict the actions of government, you are really outside of the realm of economics