Quote:
Anyway, you keep employing pragmatism as a method for teaching people to want smaller government. You are using pragmatism as a theory of knowledge. But pragmatism fails as a theory of knowledge because if the mark of success is the way to ascertain truth, then one cannot know the truth until after one has acted. But one of the primary purposes of knowledge is to permit a person to make an informed choice (before one has acted), and choices are always about the future, not the past. In pragmatism, one always knows too late. One cannot know, and make choices based on knoweldge, in a pragmatic framework.
So even using pragmatism as a way to teach people about smaller government will result in failure.
I am not talking about pragmatism vs. deontology, I am refuting pragmatism as you are using it: as a theory for knowledge. Pragmatism does not and cannot give people knowledge. So your entire argument (that we must employ tax choice as a way to find out what government is best) fails before it even starts. Why don't you engage my refutation?