[Wittrs] The Tactical Paraphrase: From Fallacy to Factuality
- From: Joseph Polanik <jpolanik@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 05 May 2010 06:22:04 -0400
SWM wrote:
>I suggest those "who came in late" read the actual original exchange
>you and I had and then read Dennett's text which is transcribed onto
>this list. (He does go on to mention the implication of that as being a
>believe in an "immortal soul" but that is to show why one needs to be
>careful in embracing such a Searlean view, to wit, one finds oneself on
>the same wavelength as believers in souls and immortality, etc.)
I doubt that other list members will want to research the archives just
to settle a dispute over who has the more accurate account of thread
history; but, of course, they are free to do so.
OTOH, it is possible that others might be willing to provide some
feedback concerning the tactical aspects of your so-called paraphrase of
Dennett's text.
the facts appear to be undisputed.
the text reads something like Cartesian dualists believe that more of
the same will not produce understanding; but, your 'paraphrase'
interprets the text as if it read 'only Cartesian dualists believe that
more of the same will not produce understanding'.
this interpolation results in a claim whose logical properties are very
different from those of Dennett's actual text.
the text would be symbolized as
[1] C -> X [being a Cartesian dualist entails believing X (in this case
that more of the same will not produce understanding)]
the paraphrase would be symbolized as
[2] X -> C [believing X entails being a Cartesian dualist]
it is undisputed that Searle believes X.
drawing the conclusion 'Searle is a Cartesian dualist' from this fact
plus [1] is a fallacy (affirming the consequent).
drawing the conclusion 'Searle is a Cartesian dualist' from this fact
plus [2] is a valid move (modus ponens).
hence, the tactical effect of 'paraphrasing' the text as if it read [2]
instead of [1] is to turn fallacy into factuality
* * *
so, fellow list members, one question: does Stuart's paraphrase change
the meaning of the text?
Joe
--
Nothing Unreal is Self-Aware
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
http://what-am-i.net
@^@~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@^@
==========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
