In fact a corollary. Causation is the easiest explanation for anything, unfortunately it's a fallacy - so it's not a very high quality explanation.
(Great to get back to the real issues on MD.) Ian On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Ian Glendinning <[email protected]> wrote: > John, Andre, DMB, > > You say you are convinced where I said I wasn't John, but this is just > word play. > > I agree with you. Causation isn't better explained. It's better > dropped as being "a fallacy". > > Increasing value is a better empirical view than causation, but this > isn't any easier to explain (eg to a MoQish judge) > > Ian > > On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:43 PM, John Carl <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ian and Andre, I am convinced. >> >> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Andre Broersen >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Ian to dmb: >>> >>> I'm not convinced that Pirsig's replacement of causation between >>> objects with patterns of preference involving conceptual patterns >>> actually makes the explanation of causation any easier. >>> >>> >> I came across this problem my freshman year of high school. I wrote about >> it as a subject for an English class, and sort of expected some interest or >> intrigue from my teacher over what I termed "the fallacy of cause and >> effect". All he wrote on the top of my paper was that my "Hume-ian stance >> wouldn't get me very far if I was ever brought up before a judge for >> "causing" an accident. >> >> > Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
