Talk:Luddite fallacy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on 2007-03-10. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] jobless growth

Perhaps nothing was meant by removing the criticism of jobless growth, but I think that Easterly wants the Luddite fallacy to be a direct response to this literature (in fact, he's kinda "name calling"). Should this article discuss how jobless growth and Luddite fallacy research intersects? Also, now that I notice the article at jobless growth, I'm wondering about a merge... On the other hand, that article focuses more on growth out of a recession, while this is talking about growth as development. Smmurphy^(Talk) 06:25, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

My apologies, the deletion of the statement was accidental (I have WP:Popups installed and whenever I highlight any text with my mouse, a new window pops up at the top of the screen, further extending the area that is highlighted). I have re-added the statement (although I'm not sure if it's in the best place). The topics of Luddite fallacy and jobless growth do, as you have noted, interesect, but they are distinct (in origin and common use). The term "Luddite fallacy" is mostly affiliated with opposition to technological advancement, which is not the focus of "jobless growth". Again, my apologies for removing the statement. I had no intention of doing so and it certainly belongs in the article. -- Black Falcon 06:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course, no apology is necessary. I'm not near the economist to be able to fight over whether jobless growth is ludditism or not. I mentioned it here in case the connection was totally misplaced, just so my wrong-headedness didn't make its way too far on WP mainspace. I (or someone) will better integrate the text soon, I'm sure. Best, Smmurphy^(Talk) 07:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)