Re: [quickphilosophy] Re: 1.12; 1.13; 1.2 & 1.21
- From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 09:37:19 +0100
Circularity undermines explanations just as much as arguments.
On 07/09/10 02:45, walto wrote:
>
> --- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:quickphilosophy%40yahoogroups.com>, Martin N Brampton
> <martin.lists@...> wrote:
> >
> > That seems a circular argument - it only works if you assume at the
> > outset that it is true.
> >
>
> Maybe it would be circular if it were an argument, but it isn't an
> argument at all. It's an explanation.
>
> W
Other related posts:
