Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : George Gilder - Forbes ASAP -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dan B. who wrote (466)	4/20/1998 2:24:00 AM
From: Dragonfly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5853

Her premise, as it usually is, is a conclusion and is not supported by evidence provided in her statement. She requires you to take as faith that anti-trust laws make all three pricing methods illeagal. You accept the premise as true because it feels true, but it is, in fact, an oversimplification to the point of not being actually true. Sure you can find an example in all three cases. I can find an example of a man and a woman who have committed a crime. But you cannot claim that therefore by being born you are a criminal. But, if I say to you "people are criminals", you will probably accept this premise, because in the general sense it is true. You will not assume that it means that you or I are criminals. But in this case because you are not thinking of it personally, (you are not a business), when she then says the equivilent of "being born makes you a criminal" you accept it. You could say that she is using slight of hand to make you accept the premise without thinking it through. I think she is relying on the fact that it feels true, because rather than think through everything to the deepest level, we often accept premises based on an intitial reaction. It feels true. But, it isn't. Dragonfly