From: Michael M. Butler (mmb@spies.com)
Date: Wed Dec 04 2002 - 00:40:56 MST
2002-12-03 13:08:01, Damien Sullivan <phoenix@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 01:56:37PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote:
>> ### OK, you don't want to pay. You won't let me kill the bad guy (who, say,
>> killed my wife). What do you want to do? Let him go free, and keep killing?
>
>Who you think killed your wife.
Sheesh. Phenomenology-epistemology time again.
Damien, can you bring yourself to acknowledge that there are circumstances where (to the degree one can
aver that *anything* ever really happened), it is possible for a husband to be as correct that Miscreant X
killed his wife as it is possible for a man or woman to be correct that he or she has just cut himself or
herself shaving?
MMB, puzzled by the fact that on the aggregate, circumstantial evidence, witness recall, testimony and
juries *all* have error rates that would warrant a _product_ recall if a multinational was caught selling
them...
PS: I can't believe I let myself get sucked into this thread.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:58:33 MST