From: | David Buehrer <dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [OT] Nuances of Language |
Date: | Thu, 7 May 1998 13:48:40 -0600 |
/
/ Michael Broadwater wrote:
/ >>Wow, I've seen some trolls in my time, but that was one of the more
/ >>annoying.
/ >
/ >Don't you hate it when you snip to much?
/ >
/ >"And if you'll look closely the top of an X looks like the top of a
/ >Y. So a Y is a different looking X, and vice versa. So from one
/ >viewpoint, "X would still be X if it didn't have Y, it would just be
/ >different." works."
/ >
/ >Is what I was refering to. And, to clarify my point, while David meant
/ >this as humor (I think), this is illogical, and he knows it (or should).
/ >The only possible reason you make an arguement like this is to get people
/ >to keep arguing. The cake analogy makes more sense. I'd like to see
/ >anyone get through a math or logic course using the previous statement.
/
/ Heh - one of the things that I learned in my logic courses at UW
/ was that you can build logical systems to prove whatever you want.
/ It's just a matter of choosing appropriate axioms to derive the
/ rest of the system from, and then convincing everybody that those
/ were the right axioms to choose... :-)
Or in my case, plain old Xioms :-D
-David-who's-agoin-straight-to-hell-for-that-one
--
"Truth, like a torch, the more it's shook it shines."
- Sir William Hamilton
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm