From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo Thu Feb 20 15:19:57 EST 1992
Article 3647 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!psych.toronto.edu!christo
>From: christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green)
Subject: Re: MUST Philosopy be a Waste of Time?
Message-ID: <1992Feb11.190201.20670@psych.toronto.edu>
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
References: <1992Feb04.060419.21963@convex.com> <1992Feb05.011716.8427@norton.com> <403@tdatirv.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1992 19:02:01 GMT

In article <403@tdatirv.UUCP> sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:
>
>This is why I do not accept *anything* said by a philosopher that does not
>have at least *some* observational basis.
>
Poor guy. Then you must not believe in modus ponens, or the law of 
contradiction. It's astounding that you survive the day. :-)

>I would pay more attention to one scientist than any number of philosophers.

And tell me, How did that scientist get his theory of knowledge, or his
theory of truth? Or is he, like most scientists, pretty fuzzy on both
concepts. Does he have any ethics? Does he wonder about his conceptual
distinctions (like between matter and non-matter)? Does he have any more
real education than, say, your average engineer? Or does he just plod
along thinking the usual dumb-ass stuff like that "Some X are Y" implies
(at leat "probabilistically", whatever that might mean) that "All X are Y"?
And that "All X are Y" implies that "All Y are X" (at least sometimes)?
Please say you're being hyperbolic and not just plain foolish.
>
-- 
Christopher D. Green                christo@psych.toronto.edu
Psychology Department               cgreen@lake.scar.utoronto.ca
University of Toronto
---------------------


