Comment: okay

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Thank you very much for your (see in situ)


I will revisit that part of your text with more detail at another time because i currently have some things to attend to.

I look forward to talking to you about the "meat of your argument."

On the topic of people giving you ad-hominems: I think it's trite to even talk about. (Since I honestly felt you common on across in that same way.) - lets not get caught up in that. Lets move on to your ideas for which bothers me that you cannot just simply state them; you refer people to your texts; which is not a bad thing- it simply comes across in not the best light. so please lets be as succinct as possible here.

No one likes to be told they are wrong (period). Dialogues like this are to be had in charity. Sure these "icons" are admirable; but the consensus I have found is that its not about them but about their ideas that lead people to further clarity of mind.

By Nominalism do you mean an exclusion of universals along with analogical predications, or just an exclusion of universals while still adhering to analogical predications?

"We’ve moved beyond the Mises textbook. We’re running in the open market." - Erik Voorhees