Well, the analogy is about tainting by association. If Caplan's definition is flawed, it ought to be critiqued on its own merits, and not because some other distasteful entity also uses that definition.
Well, the analogy is about tainting by association. If Caplan's definition is flawed, it ought to be critiqued on its own merits, and not because some other distasteful entity also uses that definition.
Well, the analogy is about tainting by association. If Caplan's definition is flawed, it ought to be critiqued on its own merits, and not because some other distasteful entity also uses that definition.