Illogicality, in general, doesnt seem like a bother, in fact it seems that life – or even being – is not entirely logical. To use oxygen, we need to burn, a process that in itself isn’t danger-less.. Might have been more “logical” to have a different approach.. (illogicality – hence many people might have difficulty accepting anarchic & evolutionary processes..?)
Hypocrisy, in very simple terms, is in my mind when an entity changes what they say and do according to their interests. You shouldn’t have cocaine, but its fine for me because, err, i am responsible and you aren’t. Or, you should tighten your financial belt, but I can not do that because errrr I am richer than you anyway..
When am thinking one thing is there/being/true, but it isn’t, I guess, that that is a sort of fallacious thinking. If I think that if I aked you to get me some bread, you agreed, and I expected bread rather than the dead rat you brought – I might have had a fallacious thinking of expectation. Or, if I thought that X place is to the north of me, when it actually was to the west – it can be argued that I had a fallacious sense. However, there are slightly more structural/innate kind of fallacies. eg, Might is right. Or, that if many people agree to X being true – then it must be true, etc..
So.. After all that intro..
When people/new-liberal/washington-consensus/capitalists say stuff to the effect of:
Economy is a game theory science with predictable models, universal disprovable axioms, and the capitalistic economic model – as harsh as it might be at times – is just the way nature/science shows economic practices should be. (hence attempts to “disturb” these processes are wrong from the outset, against economic nature..)
Now, how should the call for fairness in capitalistic economic activities
be taken in this context?
fair pay – 1. as if money is a fair way of sharing and providing economic awards & rewards. 2. that there are certain fair/un-fair numerical awards/rewards that can be given to people. (eg some pay is too much, or too less..)
basic income – it will be fairer.
times are hard – so lets al tighten belts, its only fair..
If indeed, the new-liberal/washington-consensus/capitalist economic practices are just the way things should be – then surely, fairness doesn’t come into this?
eg, if the sea is wet -0 eg if capitalist economy is natural – there’s nothing we can do to change the wetness nature of the sea, right?
It is just an if A = B. If 1 = 2 / if dark = bark etc. If economy = tough-rides.
In that sense, is it not the case that if they are correct regarding the nature of capitalistic economy, then fairness doesn’t come into this? In a sense, because fairness in that case, is supposed to be integral to the economic cycle A constitutive element of it (eg reform of financial institutions, usage of interest rates to divert economic activities this way or another) – then even arguing that fairness is about mitigations of the hard times – is either hypocritical, fallacious, or logically flawed..?