[lit-ideas] Re: Illogical but true...

  • From: wokshevs@xxxxxx
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andreas Ramos <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 17:12:40 -0330

My message for Andreas was sent only to him and it was meant for his eyes only.
Andreas may have been misled by my use of the third person. The message
remains, however, a personal message to Andreas. 

May I recommend that in the future, perhaps we should first obtain consent from
the sender of a personal message before posting it online to the list. This
would seem to be sound list protocol to me. 

On the substantive issues involved, I have nothing to add beyond what I have
already said on this matter barring further argumentation from Andreas.
Repetition of claims made is of no epistemic worth.

Walter O.
MUN



Quoting Andreas Ramos <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

> Walter, you're ignoring the issue and bringing up irrelevant side issues.
> 
> The question is whether an illogical statement can be true. According to 
> logic, that's impossible. Nevertheless, illogical-but-true sentences really 
> exist.
> 
> yrs,
> andreas
> www.andreas.com
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
> To: <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2008 1:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [lit-ideas] Re: Illogical but true...
> 
> 
> >I reject not quantum mechanics but the conclusions Andreas's interpretation
> 
> >of
> > it claims to follow. I believe the reasoning is accurately illustrated by 
> > the
> > hypothetical inference he erroneously draws below from the premises 
> > available
> > to him.
> >
> > But Andreas's question is indeed interesting. Lawyers will recognize it as
> 
> > a
> > "leading question." Somewhat similar to "Have you stopped beating your 
> > wife?"
> > Politicians will savour it for its features of public definition: the 
> > opponent
> > is defined as possessing certain attributes by the very act of asking the
> > question. Regardless of the answer, it is the question that stays in the 
> > minds
> > of the audience. Roman Polanski understood this quite well.
> >
> > The question also appeals to a wide audience of people who labour under 
> > the
> > "townie/gownie" divide. The recipient of the question is portrayed as an 
> > ivory
> > tower bloke, mesmorized by theory and hopelessly innured against the 
> > "real"
> > world of concrete facts and the imminent exigencies of the "practical 
> > world."
> >
> > Stylistically, the very shortness, crispness and
> > succinctness of the expressed question itself serves to differentiate the
> > virtuous speaker from the overly-academicized/-theorized 
> > recipient/opponent.
> >
> > And all this is to say that we remain in the realm of rhetoric and 
> > politics,
> > rather than philosophy and the pursuit of truth.
> >
> > Cheers, Walter
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Quoting Andreas Ramos <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> >> So, Walter, you reject quantum mechanics because theory doesn't permit 
> >> it?
> >>
> >> yrs,
> >> andreas
> >> www.andreas.com
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- 
> >> From: <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
> >> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Andreas Ramos" <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Cc: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 2:06 PM
> >> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Illogical but true...
> >>
> >>
> >> > Quoting Andreas Ramos <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> >
> >> >> >A sentence, specifically a statement or proposition, cannot be both
> >> >> >illogical
> >> >> > and true (or false). As far as I know, nobody has shown this to be
> >> >> > false,
> >> >> > not
> >> >> > even Plato or Andreas. Illogical utterances cannot be truth value
> >> >> > candidates
> >> >> > since they possess no identifiable truth conditions. We don't know 
> >> >> > what
> >>
> >> >> > in
> >> >>
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > world would count as a verification or a falsification of the
> >> >> > statement.
> >> >>
> >> >> But Walter, I did show this a few days ago. The sentence was both
> >> >> illogical
> >> >> and true.
> >> >>
> >> >> Check your deleted mail.
> >> >
> >> > Balderdash, du hast showed no such thing. You commit the errors I cite 
> >> > in
> >> > my
> >> > post on this matter of a few days ago.
> >> >
> >> > Repeating claims already made does not count as furthering epistemic
> >> > warrant for
> >> > those claims.
> >> >
> >> > Having dispatched all present philosophical responsibilities, I return 
> >> > to
> >> > a very
> >> > nice 18 yr. old Glenlivet, turkey, family, friends and a kidnapped
> >> > snowplough
> >> > driver. (Not necessarily in that order, of course.)
> >> >
> >> > Waiting for Christmas,
> >> >
> >> > Walter O.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> yrs,
> >> >> andreas
> >> >> www.andreas.com
> >> >>
> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> >> >> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> >> > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> >> >
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> >> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> >>
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
> 



------------------------------------------------------------------
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: