[lit-ideas] Re: Paralogisms of Heat
- From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:40:22 +0100 (BST)
--- On Wed, 20/10/10, Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Again, the onus probandi seems to lie on McEvoy. I cannot
> see why Popper
> would deny Geary's utterance, "Women make me hot" an
> empirical status.
I didn't deny or assert that, for P, it had "empirical status" but asserted
that for him it is not in itself perforce empirical. No statement per se is
perforce empirical in P's view. Its empirical status depends on the way the
statement is tested or testable and that cannot be determined by looking at the
statement per se.
So if "Women make me hot" is equivalent to something like "The sight or sound
or just thinking of women can cause me to have an erection, my heart to beat
faster etc." then it may be empirically testable.
The onus probandi is here thus neither here nor there.
Donal
Donal
> Speranza
> ----- my last post today -- three posts sent while Geary
> is still
> sleeping. Is that ridiculous, or what?
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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:
