I probably should have said something earlier, haha. But anyways. Adam Smith was not a philosopher, he was an economist at best. David is right, and under your logic anyone is a philosopher.
Don't complain about being flamed, as you entered this thread in a belligerent fashion, and it only seems david and victor are returning the favor. Anyways, you weren't flamed, others were only reciprocating, and David wasn't being offensive either, mildly caustic, at best.
Adam Smith is the father of economics, yes. He theorized Capitalism, yes. Is he a philosopher? No. He's an economist. Einstein theorized the theory of relativity among many other theories and laws in physics, but he's not a philosopher. He was a physicist.
I know what L'aissez Faire means too... what is your point? L'aissez faire isn't just an approach to economics, it's also an approach to government as well.
I don't understand how your classes qualify you to make such assertions. Using that logic, I would be more qualified as my classes are:
I'm a senior in high school, btw.
IB English 2
IB Spanish 5
IB Business & Organization 2
Psychology
AP environmental science
AP Calc. AB
Bio-Ethics
All of those classes with the exception of psychology are honors classes, and I'm also involved in debate, and I think it's safe to assume that I know more about capitalism than you do, although I still have a long way to go before truly understanding anything.
Anyways, the important thing is... there is a slight disagreement on the forums, so just let it go. Please don't be discouraged by this incident, DaWhim, or any other parties, but if you are going to make an assertion, be able to defend it, maturely, and intelligently, please.
__________________
word is bond
Last edited by tm11 on 10-22-2002 at 02:28 AM
|