Economic Freedom and Political Freedom
Famous encomiast Milton Friedman argues that “capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom.” In other words to obtain a total democracy, capitalism should be a key element. Although Freidman’s argument is agreeable, it lacks important characteristics that are used to create a strong argument. Arguments have rules and regulations that should be followed to make them creditable, logical, and understood by the audience. Milton Friedman ideas can be agreed with, but his argument is not convictable. Friedman’s argument is missing important qualities of a good argument these include failure to have the proper thought organization, only arguing to support his claim, and lack of solid evidence. To start with, Friedman’s failure to organize his thoughts weaken his argument that “capitalism is a necessary condition for political freedom.” When arguing an idea, one must capture their audience’s attention. Friedman had agreeable ideas, however his thoughts were unorganized, making it challenging for his audience to stay focused. Friedman gives an example to support his theory that capitalism is essential to have total freedom using the Amish. He explains that the Amish “regarded compulsory federal old age programs as an infringement of their individual freedom and refused to pay taxes or accept benefits.” He goes on to explain the result of their refusal, but then changes from the injustice of social programs and talks about laws that put restrictions on economic affairs. These two ideas are different, therefore they should not be expected to flow together. To make a good argument, ideas should be complete and link back to the question that is being argued. Secondly, Friedman only argues to support his claim that capitalism is required to obtain political freedom. These action are considered “stacking the deck”, one of the many logical fallacies. Logical Fallacies should be avoided at all cost to make a convincing...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document