In three different posts, Brent Meeker wrote :
I'm not sure that logic in the formal sense can be right or wrong;
it's a set of conventions about
language and inference. About the only standard I've seen by which a
logic or mathematical system
could be called wrong is it if it is
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what members
of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their survival
in the evolutionary
biological sense. So the majority can
--- 1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
(Skip to 1Z's reply)
If you want to judge what is better in terms of
survival,
you need to use logic.
And then you may be still wrong, things sometimes
occur (in our terms - see below) as illogical or
even: counterproductive. Human
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what members
of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their survival
in the evolutionary
biological sense. So the
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what
members of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their
survival in the evolutionary
Jesse Mazer wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what
members of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their
survival in the
Brent Meeker:
Jesse Mazer wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what
members of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their
Jesse Mazer wrote:
Brent Meeker:
Jesse Mazer wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what
members of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their
John M wrote:
--- 1Z [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
(Skip to 1Z's reply)
If you want to judge what is better in terms of
survival,
you need to use logic.
And then you may be still wrong, things sometimes
occur (in our terms - see below) as illogical or
even:
Lennart Nilsson wrote:
No, you have the burden of showing what possible worlds could possibly mean
outside a real biological setting.
Cooper shows that logical laws are dependent on which population model they
refer to. Of course that goes for the notion of possibility also...
That sounds
Lennart Nilsson wrote:
No, you have the burden of showing what possible worlds could possibly mean
outside a real biological setting.
I have shown that; HYPOTHETICAL states-of-affairs which do not
contradict
any laws KNOWN TO US.
Cooper shows that logical laws are dependent on which
Le 09-juil.-06, à 10:07, Jesse Mazer a écrit :
Lennart Nilsson wrote:
No, you have the burden of showing what possible worlds could
possibly mean
outside a real biological setting.
Cooper shows that logical laws are dependent on which population
model they
refer to. Of course that
1Z wrote:
Lennart Nilsson wrote:
No, you have the burden of showing what possible worlds could possibly mean
outside a real biological setting.
I have shown that; HYPOTHETICAL states-of-affairs which do not
contradict
any laws KNOWN TO US.
Cooper shows that logical laws are
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what members
of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their survival in
the evolutionary
biological sense. So the majority can be wrong.
Cooper is making valid
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what members
of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their survival in
the evolutionary
biological sense. So the majority can be wrong.
Cooper is
Brent Meeker wrote:
1Z wrote:
Brent Meeker wrote:
You misunderstand population models. It's not a question of what
members of a species think or
vote for; it's a matter of whether their logic will lead to their
survival in the evolutionary
biological sense. So the majority can be
Le 06-juil.-06, à 21:49, Lennart Nilsson a écrit :
x-tad-biggerBruno;/x-tad-bigger
x-tad-biggerAccording to Cooper classical analysis is plain bad biology,
/x-tad-bigger
?
x-tad-biggerand not a matter of subjective judgement or philosophical preferens (such as taking atithmetical truth for
17 matches
Mail list logo
