Re: [quickphilosophy] Re: 1.12; 1.13; 1.2 & 1.21

  • From: wittrsl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:31:39 +0100

Not really, an explanation that relies on the terms to be explained is 
just not effective as an explanation.  No need to go to extremes.


On 07/09/10 14:08, walto wrote:
>
> --- In quickphilosophy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:quickphilosophy%40yahoogroups.com>, Martin Brampton
> <martin.lists@...> wrote:
>  >
>  > Circularity undermines explanations just as much as arguments.
>  >
>
> Only for foundationalists.
>
> W

Other related posts: