- Thread starter
- #41
That's not attacking Krugman, that's a fact. Krugman would also say Hayek is full of it. I was trying to point out that using the Nobel Prize as an appeal to authority is pointless because there are too many conflicting ideologies who have won the Nobel Prize.
And you seem to have a problem with so-called "ideologues," but Krugman is an ideologue as well. So if you really have a problem with "ideologues" then you shouldn't cite a Keynesian ideologue like Krugman. You shouldn't cite anyone because everyone has an ideology.
You are tying yourself in knots here. Step back and take a few deep breaths. Then reconsider what you have written. Then go here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/general-discussion/121927-the-anosognosic-s-dilemma-but-i-wore-the-juice.html
If I'm too stupid to realize that I'm being stupid, how could I know how I'm being stupid? I'd obviously need somebody as enlightened as yourself to point it out to me.
It is my opinion that pointing something like that out, would be useless. The experiments mentioned in the article and the links to it, prove this to be true.