Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,sci.logic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!library.ucla.edu!info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!csus.edu!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Putnam reviews Penrose.
Message-ID: <jqbDBFoAH.Iy7@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <3t9grb$l79@mp.cs.niu.edu> <3tfsv2$908@nnrp.ucs.ubc.ca> <3tm9q2$ldu@toves.cs.city.ac.uk> <3tmicm$ma4@bell.maths.tcd.ie>
Date: Sun, 9 Jul 1995 05:23:05 GMT
Lines: 25
Sender: jqb@netcom7.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:29766 sci.logic:12035

In article <3tmicm$ma4@bell.maths.tcd.ie>,
Timothy Murphy <tim@maths.tcd.ie> wrote:
>jampel@cs.city.ac.uk (Michael Jampel) writes:
>
>>In my opinion, the people who are Realists in the quantum mechanical
>>sense (i.e.\ trying to avoid Uncertainty) and who are also anti-AI,
>>should perhaps ask themselves if they hold these views due to a
>>sub-conscious desire to place Man at the centre of things again, which
>>is a very religion-inspired view of the world.
>
>Surely this kind of argument is utterly worthless.
>It is analagous to criticising Eine Kleine Nacht Musik
>because of Mozart's table manners,
>or disregarding Turing's views because he was homosexual (and half-Irish).

Or because they don't stay within "the limits of common courtesy".

But this begs the question.  These people *should* ask themselves that, as we
should all examine whether our biases and prejudices affect what theories we
respect, if we are intellectually honest.  The fact that it is an ad hominem
mistake for others to argue against our views based upon such factors is a
somewhat different issue.
-- 
<J Q B>

