From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Mon May 13 2002 - 10:55:42 MDT
On Monday, May 13, 2002, at 02:40 am, Reason wrote:
> Let me see now:
>
> * Take a starting point of defining a human being as being the set of
> average performers out of a large group of people.
> * Circularly define humans as being something that can pass a Turing
> Test
> conducted by another human.
> * Most young children are not human.
If you had presented this example in a freshman logic course, you would
have failed. This is classic circular logic. You asserted a definition
in step one that excludes some groups. You then measure groups against
your definition in step two, which excluded the group you excluded in
step one. Then you conclude that since the excluded group failed your
test of inclusion they therefore should be excluded. You conclusion is
just a restatement of your premise, and is only as true as your premise.
In other words, you have proven that if we don't count children as
human, and we test humans to exclude children, that children will be
excluded by our test, therefore we should exclude children because they
don't count as humans, because they don't pass the test, that we
designed to exclude them because they aren't human....
-- Harvey Newstrom, CISSP <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> Principal Security Consultant <www.Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:02 MST