Talk:Self-refuting idea/Archives/2013
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Self-refuting idea. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
section: Indirectly self-denying statements or "fallacy of the stolen concept"
May I suggest that Objectivist perspectives should be granted little or no coverage in general, high-level summary articles about philosophy and logic (except perhaps in articles about political philosophy, where Objectivism may be relevant as an example of an extreme and exaggerated libertarian position.) Objectivism is a highly fringe, largely self-contained ideological community whose ideas are (quite properly, imho) taken with little or no seriousness outside of the Objectivist community itself. The current section comprises a straightforward recounting of a Randian claim, followed by a well-meaning but rambling, distracting, and potentially O.R. refutation. The section should probably be removed entirely, or at least trimmed down to one or two sentences integrated within a different and more generally relevant section. 205.211.141.67 (talk) 19:58, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
- To amplify: the current "variations" section is, by word count, about 60% devoted to one very particular Randian claim, with only fleeting references to the likes of Epimenides, Russell, and Gödel. Only a Rand acolyte could possibly see this as an appropriate weighting, and even then, it would have to be a particularly uncritical one. 205.211.141.67 (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)