[lit-ideas] Re: Does the sign say its own sense? An Austrian example
- From: Phil Enns <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 13:49:04 -0400
Donal wrote:
"Absent anything explicit, Phil would have us believe there can be no
rational argument as to what is implicit here."
I would have people believe no such thing. In fact, I very clearly
implied the need for rational argument when I wrote:
'Since Donal's claims concern what is implicit, the appropriate
response is not a rebuttal or refutation but rather an acknowledgement
that the claim is convincing or not.'
As I understand it, to be convinced is to be convinced with reasons.
My point is that the rational argument in this case is of a kind that
does not permit proof or demonstration, only more or less convincing.
And in this case, Donal's argument is not convincing, and in need of
more and better rational arguments.
Explicitly,
Phil Enns
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
