From: J. R. Molloy (jr@shasta.com)
Date: Wed Nov 21 2001 - 08:12:02 MST
From: "Brian D Williams" <talon57@well.com>
> And yet ad hominem aside (and yes it belongs aside) it is John who
> has presented correct facts, whereas Samantha's position is a
> mixture of conjecture, anti-Americanism, and urban (global) myth.
Isn't a mixture of conjecture, anti-Americanism, and urban (global) myth
sufficiently close to blithering idiocy to justify the attack on this idiotic
opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made? I mean,
in this case, it's not so much a question of ad hominem as it is a matter of
accurately calling a spade a spade (or of identifying a blithering idiot as a
blithering idiot).
"There is no shame in not knowing; the shame lies in not finding out."
--Russian Proverb
--- --- --- --- ---
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, cryonics, individual
uniqueness, ego, human values, scientific relinquishment, malevolent AI,
non-sensory experience
We move into a better future in proportion as science displaces superstition.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:12:04 MST