Cathy apparently needs a drink. Don't we all. She's confused my 'reasoning from' the case of wanting a beer now with a 'reasoning to' that same point. Rather than just 'rationalising a basic human action' as she thought I was doing, I was trying to see where that most basic of human actions -- an overwhelming 'attack of the nows' -- gets us. In this case, the fundamental desire of wanting jam today rather than waiting for jam tomorrow leads to the phenomenon of interest. Who would have thunk it. The idea appealed to me after a couple of beers, and was identical to the point already made by some genuinely learned blokes, one of whom (Mises) has made a whole science out of seeing where these "most basic of human actions" lead us when analysed with some good skull sweat.
Oh well, at least I can agree with her sentiment: "It leads me to the conclusion that I actually need a drink right now." Who could disagree with that (and who needs an excuse)? Who knows where thoughts might lead after a quiet couple?