--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "> 2) in the absence of an obvious natural cause, there must be an
> > unknown and un-natural cause
> > +++ In the absence of an obvious natural cause, there must be an
> unknown and natural cause otherwise what you see isn't happening.
> Like the rest of us, Mr. Kurtz can make observations that
> reflect his opinion and don't have great merit. N."
>
>
> If i understand your point correctly, the difference is between one
> person saying "I heard a sound last night", and another saying "It
> must be a ghost".
>
+++ It's more like I wondered if something had a cause that couldn't
be seen as scientific, would Mr Kurtz deny it happened.
Maybe it's a case of "believing is seeing" as Yoda said. N.
> --- In [email protected], "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2001@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], new_morning_blank_slate
> > <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Curtis,
> > > I agree with the general point that using words in
discussions with
> > > others that have a perjorative connonation -- to them -- is not
> > > usually helpful to the tone and fruitfulness of the discussion.
Often
> > > this occurs when there is not a common understanding of meaning.
> > > Reading your recent posts /cites from Kurtz helped me sharpen up my
> > > definition of "magical thinking" -- as I hope, perhaps naievly (that
> > > they read it), it has for others
> > >
> > > And I don't think the term is necessarily pejoritive when
understood.
> > > Some ascribe to its merits and value, others do not. Its becomes a
> > > simple statement of fact about someones mode of inquiry for one
> who has
> > > "an actual ignorance of the natural causes of events in
question,
> > > ... the assumption that, in the absence of an obvious natural cause,
> > > there must be an unknown and un-natural cause. ... These two factors
> > > in conjunction allow for the development of ad hoc explanations,
often
> > > relying upon an assumption that correlation demonstrates causation.
> > > ... This magical thinking is certainly irrational, in that it
> > > deliberately bases conclusions upon a clear lack of demonstrable
> > > evidence and without regard for logical coherence or
consistency. ...
> > > but why are people tempted to accept these stories? The
explanation is
> > > twofold - first our innate creativity, and second our penchant for
> > > seeking patterns. Together, they can lead people to false beliefs. "
> > > (Kurtz)
> > >
> > > There are those on this list that openly proclaim, or demonstrate a
> > > strong belief in via, their writings that:
> > >
> > > 1) correlation demonstrates causation
> > >
> > > 2) in the absence of an obvious natural cause, there must be an
> > > unknown and un-natural cause
> > > +++ In the absence of an obvious natural cause, there must be an
> > unknown and natural cause otherwise what you see isn't happening.
> > Like the rest of us, Mr. Kurtz can make observations that
> > reflect his opinion and don't have great merit. N.
> >
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Home is just a click away. Make Yahoo! your home page now.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/DHchtC/3FxNAA/yQLSAA/UlWolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
