Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic,sci.cognitive
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: FIRST order?
Message-ID: <jqbDC05BJ.MEp@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <jqbDBsunG.C6H@netcom.com> <jqbDBu09v.G9H@netcom.com> <3ufol9$7sg@saba.info.ucla.edu> <3ukmgh$7lr@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 1995 06:42:55 GMT
Lines: 17
Sender: jqb@netcom22.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai:31701 comp.ai.philosophy:30596 sci.logic:12788 sci.cognitive:8430

In article <3ukmgh$7lr@percy.cs.bham.ac.uk>,
Aaron Sloman <A.Sloman@cs.bham.ac.uk> wrote:

>I should add that I am surprised that so sophisticated a thinker as
>Michael believes that introspection can be a reliable source of
>generalisations about the nature of our minds. It's just another
>form of perception, and no more trustworthy as a source of
>generalisations than any other form of perception: i.e. tomorrow a
>counter-example may appear.

Yes, it is puzzling that ideology can have such a powerful grip, isn't it?
But unlike Zeleny and Wiener, neither you nor I make the mistake of thinking
that those who appear to believe things contrary to the most trivial
observations and logic are thereby stupid, retarded, or morons.
-- 
<J Q B>

