Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy,comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!netcom.net.uk!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Sorities, Properties and The Extensional Stance
Message-ID: <jqbE2osM4.23o@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <Pine.GSO.3.95L.961218113526.9334A-100000@unixs6.cis.pitt.edu> <851007099snz@longley.demon.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 00:42:04 GMT
Lines: 21
Sender: jqb@netcom.netcom.com
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.ai.philosophy:50182 comp.ai:42914

In article <851007099snz@longley.demon.co.uk>,
David Longley <David@longley.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <Pine.GSO.3.95L.961218113526.9334A-100000@unixs6.cis.pitt.edu>
>           cdjones+@pitt.edu "CDJ" writes:
>
>> (4) Longley's Rule: On pain of being a rhetorical trickster, one is not
>> permitted to discuss someone after having read and discussed others who
>> are relevant to that person.
>> 
>> CDJ
>> 
>
>I post what I have to say here.

Perhaps the nefarious Longley could explain how that is relevant to charging
that CDJ is a rhetorical trickster for having read Russell.  And if I have
misunderstood him, perhaps he could explain what he meant without indulging in
nefarious ad hominems.
-- 
<J Q B>

