What you are saying is the crimes against humanity and murders that Bush ordered is okay?
You need to buy a new car and put a saddle in it to stay out of the mud. Allan On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 12:12 AM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > Better to sit in the saddle then wrestle in the mud... > > On Nov 8, 1:23 pm, Allan H <[email protected]> wrote: >> I hope the republicans get off their destructive high horse. Romney is >> right both sides need to work for the benefit of the whole nation, not just >> a select few. >> Allan >> >> Matrix ** th3 beginning light >> On Nov 8, 2012 5:21 PM, "archytas" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > I was struck that Obama's acceptance speech was prime BA - we could >> > hardly disagree a word yet have no reason to believe any of it is >> > happening, will happen and is anything other than an appeal to those >> > of us with liberal biology - yet we hope it is true and don't think of >> > the real problems under its sway. Romney was a model democrat in >> > defeat, accepting the will of the people and praying for his >> > opponent. More BA as the House will already be beavering away to make >> > Obama a lame duck fit to serve with a rigsy sauce. It's all, as >> > Goffman had it, 'face work'. >> > People my age were all taught Julius Caesar was a great leader who >> > invaded Britain in 53 AD. In fact, he had been seen off the year >> > before and couldn't get his lads to board the boats. The barbarians >> > and Philistines of history turn out to have been much more civilised, >> > artistic and all round good guys compared with the Greek and Roman >> > slave-based economies who left us their songs of victory. >> >> > On 7 Nov, 13:36, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > One probably needs a critical eye to spot why this paper is itself >> > > bullshit rigsy - but you seem to have got there from the summary >> > > above. Judging from the political adverts from the US elections we >> > > sampled here last night BS has won. Polish friends in the Warsaw Pact >> > > days, skilled in Soviet hogwash, were well aware the stuff was just >> > > for public consumption and that the World Bank guff I was supposed to >> > > disseminate just our form of it. They were quick to see the >> > > apparatchiks were becoming the entrepreneurchicks following the >> > > collapse of the wall. >> > > In Britain one of our MPs is going on an Aussie TV show of the kind >> > > where they dump you in the jungle with custard and hornets in your >> > > hair. There is much protest concerning her triviality. My own view >> > > is we should develop a control experiment from this and find out how >> > > many we can dispose of in this manner before we notice an adverse >> > > effect. As an added torture we could perhaps throw this philosopher >> > > in the mix! >> >> > > On 7 Nov, 11:19, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > I suspect the ghost of Diogenes the Cynic is still looking for an >> > > > honest man. >> >> > > > On Nov 5, 10:41 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > This from an academic article sent to me on 'bullshit attacks'. >> >> > > > > Walter Carnielli >> > > > > We want to argue that falling into a specific deceptive reasoning >> > > > > which >> > > > > we call bullshit attack is not anything irrational from our side, but >> > > > > rather a >> > > > > rational response from an opponent maneuver, and that the entire >> > > > > episode can >> > > > > bee seen as a game, where logic and a certain principle of rational >> > > > > discussion >> > > > > play essential roles. Indeed, an opponent may act coercively into our >> > > > > reasoning >> > > > > process by using irrelevant facts or assertions, and by telling half >> > > > > truths in such >> > > > > a way that we feel forced to “complete” the story in a way that >> > > > > interest the >> > > > > opponent, perhaps contrary to our own interests. >> > > > > Even to define what is “to deceive” is not easy. The act of deceiving >> > > > > would >> > > > > have to be intentional, and to involve causing a belief - but what >> > > > > about acting >> > > > > as to prevent a false belief to be revised by the other person? And >> > to >> > > > > act as to >> > > > > make the other person to cease to have a true belief, or to prevent >> > > > > the person >> > > > > from acquiring a certain true belief? Of course one can deceive by >> > > > > gestures, by >> > > > > irony and also by just making questions. So there seems to be no >> > > > > universally >> > > > > accepted definition of “deceiving” yet; we assume currently a >> > > > > definition stated >> > > > > in [17]: >> > > > > To deceive = to intentionally cause another person to have or >> > > > > continue >> > > > > to have a false belief that is truly believed to be false by the >> > > > > person >> > > > > intentionally causing the false belief by bringing about evidence on >> > > > > the basis of which the other person has or continues to have that >> > > > > false >> > > > > belief. >> >> > > > > Summary. This paper intends to open a discussion on how certain >> > > > > dangerous kinds >> > > > > of deceptive reasoning can be defined, in which way it is achieved in >> > > > > a discussion, >> > > > > and which would be the strategies for defense against such deceptive >> > > > > attacks on the >> > > > > light of some principles accepted as fundamental for rationality and >> > > > > logic. >> >> > > > > Last lines (after much on Tarski and Godel) - Starting from the >> > > > > understanding that what I am proposing here is not to use methods of >> > > > > formal or informal logic to analyze fallacies, but to pay due >> > > > > attention to principles that also affect logic, discerning the >> > reasons >> > > > > why we >> > > > > succumb under a bullshit attack may help us to understand why we >> > > > > commit >> > > > > other illusions of reasoning. >> >> > > > > Anyone interested can get the full paper from me by email. >> >> > > > > On a Theoretical Analysis of Deceiving: How >> > > > > to Resist a Bullshit Attack >> > > > > Walter Carnielli >> > > > > GTAL/CLE and Department of Philosophy–IFCH, State University of >> > > > > Campinas, >> > > > > [email protected] >> >> > --- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > -- > > > -- ( ) |_D Allan Life is for moral, ethical and truthful living. I am a Natural Airgunner - Full of Hot Air & Ready To Expel It Quickly. --
