Newsgroups: comp.ai.alife,comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai,alt.consciousness
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Thought Question
Message-ID: <jqbD4roBv.9Dv@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3hsv53$ipj@oznet03.ozemail.com.au> <3hu2u9$dde@romulus.rutgers.edu> <jqbD4GIA2.5ED@netcom.com> <D4oA9o.Hos@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 1995 14:59:54 GMT
Lines: 18
Sender: jqb@netcom15.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.alife:2639 comp.ai.philosophy:25814 comp.ai:27850

In article <D4oA9o.Hos@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>,
Jeff Dalton <jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk> wrote:
>In article <jqbD4GIA2.5ED@netcom.com> jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter) writes:
>>
>>Now, you may say that "echo" isn't the right sort of programming language,
>>that that's not what you meant.  But then you never said what you meant [Jeff
>>Dalton would love you for that]. 
>
>Nonsense.  My objection is to demands for definitions, not to requests
>for explanations (unless they're just a refusal to make any effort to
>understand or to accept any of the burden of proof).

When I ask you to explain the meanings of your terms, you refuse
with this nonsense about demanding definitions.  I have tired of
such disingenuousness.
-- 
<J Q B>

