----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 8:28 AM Subject: Re: Who is the sheriff?
> But it does. As you said, it is trivial to prove, by definition. You > have a valid argument about the possible costs, but if you are still > opposing a policy that has a high success of removing Saddam, you are > therefore pro-Saddam. No hard feelings, but I have never in my life seen that proposed as a logical arguement. The syllogism I see you proposing is: If you are opposed to a plan that has a very high probability of removing X, you are pro-X. Are you really standing by that statement? > You have over-generalized. You proposed a syllogism. It begs for generalization. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
