doesn't it essentially say don't assume outside agencies when the question can be more easily answered with the facts in hand? With a little distance on the discussion though, I'll agree that it's perhaps a poor fit for this case, where the dispute actually IS the facts in hand :)
Dana On Apr 9, 2005 12:28 PM, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Kevin wrote: > > It's a deductive tool for finding simple solutions, and both of you > > are trying to leverage it to justify fairly convoluted and morally > > complicated responses of human behaviour to a situation of high moral > > and factual ambiguity. And even when you can apply it, Occam's Razor > > is about playing the odds not about finding absolute truths. > > > > I dont' agree with you if the question is: Did Mr. Schiavo "care for" > or "love" Mrs Schiavo. If you look at somebody's general pattern of > behavior you can usually deduce that. > > In this case, due to Mr. Schiavo's search for cures, amongst other > things, odd are that he was acting out of love or care rather than > some nefarious reason. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=11 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:153383 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
