On 11/11/2010 7:30 PM, Christopher Menzel wrote:
> To think that it is
> relevant that the behavior that Peirce's example describes is in some
> way irrational conflates *logical* issues with*psychological* or
> *ethical* issues, and your pointing out that there are scenarios under
> which the behavior might be justifiable encourages the confusion. (01)
I doubt that anybody made that confusion. Or at least I hope that
people who subscribe to Ontolog Forum understand such issues. (02)
I interpreted Pavithra's comment as a doubt about Peirce's sanity,
and I wanted to point out Peirce's unfortunate financial conditions. (03)
> Of course, other things aren't equal -- people are
> not purely rational beings and so it makes good sense for expository
> purposes not to risk distracting or disgusting one's readers with a
> gruesome example. But that's a pragmatic matter only, not a logical
> one. (04)
I certainly agree. (05)
John (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|