x-man, Again for me to accept your opinions would indeed be to surrender critical thinking skills. But I have come to the conclusion that "being a venom spewing troll" is perpetrated by using such venomous words.
What did you post when you broke in on my question to Michael R. Brown? Oh, here it is: --- On Mar 12, 2013, at 1:03 AM, X Acto wrote: Woman of Mars, Didya try the link he provided? derr besides who fkn cares, you can either learn from it or ignore it.. my guess is you'll ignore it and bitch that Michael doesent know jack. an thts a fact --- A demonstration of your intellectual skills? Mostly, about as good as you get! Marsh On Mar 22, 2013, at 10:14 AM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey war woman, > To borrow a phrase, all your philososhical position consists of is > running around saying ""your not the boss of me!" > > As for my criticism? all I am pointing out is your contradictory assertions > of those concepts you exhault. > You exhault killing all intellectual patterns yet praise criticle thinking > This causes me to wonder if A: you do not understand one of the terms > you are using. or B: Youre' such a vendictive asshole that it blinds you > to the use of those terms so that your blind rejection of everything I say > results in making you look like a mindless troll, thereby justifying being > a mindless troll with quotes explaining that you are just a poet. > ARE all poets mindless trolls thick with blind rage? Are they just bitter > confused people crying out for attention? > > perhaps, or maybe its just you. > > I have to wonder why you do not attack Carse for making > a projected generalization regarding Poets. I betcha if I > were to post that quote you would. > > Dont you see that doing noting but being a venom spewing troll on a > philosophy forum basically amounts to pissing all over yourself > constantly. > > ..You may get a warm feeling, but no one else seems to really care. > > .. > > .. > > > ________________________________ > From: MarshaV <[email protected]> > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > Sent: Friday, March 22, 2013 6:47 AM > Subject: Re: [MD] Explanation and explanatory power > > > Hey x-man, > > If I surrender my thinking to you or your authority ("Scientist David > Deutsch"), you might, indeed accuse me of a lack of critical thinking skills. > I have no use for a general consensus, and I choose who's words I admire: > > “Therefore, poets do not 'fit' into society, not because a place is denied > them but because they do not take their 'places' seriously. They openly see > its roles as theatrical, its styles as poses, its clothing costumes, its > rules conventional, its crises arranged, its conflicts performed and its > metaphysics ideological.” > > (Carse, James P., 'Finite and infinite Games' > > > Marsha > > > > On Mar 20, 2013, at 11:39 PM, X Acto <[email protected]> wrote: > > "Arguments aim to contribute knowledge, whereas explanations aim to > contribute understanding. > Arguments and explanations largely resemble each other in rhetorical use. > This is the cause of much difficulty in thinking critically about claims. > There are several reasons for this difficulty." > > "Explanatory power is the ability of a theory to effectively explain the > subject matter it pertains to. One theory is sometimes said to have more > explanatory power than another theory about the same subject matter if it > offers greater predictive power. That is, if it offers more details about > what we should expect to see, and what we should not." > > "Explanatory power may also suggest that more details of causal relations are > provided, or that more facts are accounted for. Scientist David Deutsch adds > that a good theory is not just predictive and falsifiable (i.e. testable); a > good explanation also provides specific details which fit together so tightly > that it is difficult to change one detail without affecting the whole theory." > > http://www.ted.com/talks/david_deutsch_a_new_way_to_explain_explanation.html > > [Ron] > It's one thing to say that each one of us has their own interpretation of a > given explanation but > it's quite another to say that one interpretation is as good as the next and > imply that through > interpretive power no general consensus may be gained as to the most accurate > interpretation > of a given philosophical work. What lends interpretive power is also that > which lends explanatory > power. > A good interpretation provides specific details which fit together so tightly > that it is difficult to > change one detail without affecting the whole theory. > > > 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 > 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 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
