Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!portc02.blue.aol.com!howland.erols.net!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Sorities, Properties and The Extensional Stance
Message-ID: <jqbE2HJKn.BAG@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <850583038snz@longley.demon.co.uk> <Pine.GSO.3.95L.961214215003.16480B-100000@unixs4.cis.pitt.edu> <850677786snz@longley.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 1996 02:43:34 GMT
Lines: 31
Sender: jqb@netcom.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:50024 comp.ai:42795

In article <850677786snz@longley.demon.co.uk>,
David Longley <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <Pine.GSO.3.95L.961214215003.16480B-100000@unixs4.cis.pitt.edu>
>           cdjones+@pitt.edu "CDJ" writes:
>
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, 14 Dec 1996, David Longley wrote:
>> 
>> > In my view, it was the new  logic of Frege which gave the logical 
>> > empiricists   their   greatest  tool  in  their   fight   against 
>> > metaphysics:
>> 
>> If, among other things, you understood (by today's standards) logic as
>> well as Carnap or Quine, or even as well as Russell, or even as well as
>> Frege, I would be more inclined to take your thoughts on the role of
>> logic more seriously.
>> 
>> CDJ
>> 
>OK..forget  about what you think *I* understand.  Consider  Quine 
>instead.  Perhaps  then you'll start to appreciate the  point  of 
>what I am saying a little better. 

If you don't understand it, then what you are saying is likely to be *wrong*,
eh?  You say the truth is independent of what we believe, and yet seem quite
unwilling to entertain the possibility that the truth contradicts what you
believe.
-- 
<J Q B>

