From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psinntp!norton!brian Wed Feb 26 12:54:26 EST 1992
Article 4001 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!psinntp!norton!brian
>From: brian@norton.com (Brian Yoder)
Subject: Re: MUST Philosopy be a Waste of Time?
Message-ID: <1992Feb25.002517.12020@norton.com>
Organization: Symantec / Peter Norton
References: <1992Feb22.233105.15817@psych.toronto.edu>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1992 00:25:17 GMT

christo@psych.toronto.edu (Christopher Green) writes:
> In article <428@tdatirv.UUCP> sarima@tdatirv.UUCP (Stanley Friesen) writes:

> > I do
> >not think this gives much scope for debate in logic, just room for choices
> >of axiom systems.

> Gee. I guess you'd better tell the _Journal of Symbolic Logic_ and the
> related academic society. And all those people who write books on
> "philosophical logic".  

I would maintain that SOME of the work done in logic DOES have some practical
value.  Would you take the position that it doesn't?  If your position is that
it ALL has some value by virtue of being what it is, please try to justify that
position.

> And then tell people like Russell and Lewis
> Strawson and Grice and Quine and Kripke and Hinitikka that their
> careers didn't exist, or weren't worth having had.

Their "careers" certainly exist(ed), but the question is whether their careers
resulted in true or useful discoveries.  Certainly Russell and Quine did their
part in obscuring the truth to a great degree and added (particularly Russell)
a great deal of nonsense to the body of philosophy during their "careers".

--Brian

-- 
-- Brian K. Yoder (brian@norton.com) - Q: What do you get when you cross     --
-- Peter Norton Computing Group      -    Apple & IBM?                       --
-- Symantec Corporation              - A: IBM.                               --
--


