[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Jackie
>> I don't always bother acknowledging epistemological arguments about the
>> nature of truth when stating facts.
>
>Now this sentence is great--truth and facts in the same breath. The fact is:
>Thomas was not convicted of perjury therefore he can not be called a
perjuror >except by silly people who think because a word may be similar it
is the same >thing.
The fact is Thomas can be called anything by any American. The truth is
what it is independent of what anybody says it is and no American is banned
from speaking truth or lies as they choose when not in violation of legislation.
What in the name of God makes you think a court is the repository of
Ultimate Truth? It matters not a whit what a court finds as far as the
truth is concerned. If an effort is made to find the truth by anyone or any
group the results may be judged to approximate the truth by the quality of
that effort and the evidence capable of assessment. If a court truly
presents a rational case based on evidence we can hope it has found the truth.
Pray tell what manner of argument invalidates evidence about Thomas' perjury
but lets us believe the earth is round or Al Capone was a racketeer? This
should be a whole new field of philosophy.
You passed the test. Your overhelming modesty is charming but you need not
even read the test to know the answers. It is the nature of a priori
knowledge. Congratulations. Des Cartes would be astonished at your
brilliant addition to his singularity: "I am even if I don't think."
>Your
>belief and your right to say that you believe he is a perjuror is fine. I
hope you
>don't call him a perjuror in the wrong place though or you might be facing
a little
>problem.
>
>> I will admit we cannot fully know the
>> earth is round, that Al Capone was a racketeer and that Clarence Thomas is a
>> perjurer. Sometimes close is good enough.
>
>I believe there is empirical evidence that the earth is more round than
flat and I
>believe Capone was convicted of a crime and there are also I believe facts
that show
>him to be a racketeer. Clarence Thomas does not fit into this
category--there are
>no facts to support this, only your belief based on the fact he wouldn't
take a lie
>detector and Anita did.
>
>>
>>
>> Your modesty is enchanting but your flawless performance on the test has to
>> be acknowledged by your admission you read it
>
>LOL--I never said I read it, merely that I flunked it. : ). So again you
made a
>subjective decision.
>
>> . We know this with Cartesian
>> certainty because it is obvious you think despite your efforts to obscure
>> that fact.
>
>ROTF!! That is about as impressive as you know what. jackief
>
>>
>>
>> >Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >
>> >
>> >Terry
>> >
>> >I really don't know where you are coming from--I said I believed--not
that he
>> >was--but that I believed was a liar. Nowhere did I acknowledge or say
he was a
>> >perjuror. Yes you are free to say any ole thing you want, but when you are
>> >discussing something to provide evidence for your view, you don't state as
>> a fact
>> >that the man was a perjuror. In a discussion like this, perjuror has a
whole
>> >different meaning.
>> >
>> >LOL--that is why I flunked your test--the decision on whether I passed or
>> not was
>> >yours to make--purely a subjective decision, I would say. But I believed I
>> flunked,
>> >therefore because I believed that was the truth, I am telling the truth
>> when I say I
>> >flunked. Sorry a score of -0.
>> >
>> >jackief
>> >
>> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Jackie,
>> >>
>> >> There is nothing in our tradition or Constitution that requires that
we not
>> >> speak plainly. If I choose to call Al Capone a racketeer, Andrew
Cunanan a
>> >> serial murderer, Clarence Thomas a perjurer, Bill Clinton an adulterer
it is
>> >> idiocy to claim I am doing something wrong because they were never
tried and
>> >> convicted of these things. A perjurer is a felon who lies under oath
about
>> >> a material matter. Justice Thomas did that as you acknowledge. Why should
>> >> we not speak plainly? If he feels he is grievously wronged he can sue.
>> >>
>> >> How would you know you flunked the test if you did not know the
answers? I
>> >> congratulate you on 100%.
>> >>
>> >> >Jackie Fellows <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >--
>> >> >In the sociology room the children learn
>> >> >that even dreams are colored by your perspective
>> >> >
>> >> >I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> >In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> Best, Terry
>> >>
>> >> "Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
>> >>
>> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >In the sociology room the children learn
>> >that even dreams are colored by your perspective
>> >
>> >I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>> >
>> >
>> Best, Terry
>>
>> "Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
>>
>> Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>
>
>
>--
>In the sociology room the children learn
>that even dreams are colored by your perspective
>
>I toss and turn all night. Theresa Burns, "The Sociology Room"
>
>
>
>Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
>
>
Best, Terry
"Lawyer - one trained to circumvent the law" - The Devil's Dictionary
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
