Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?

From: Tedd Jacobs (Jacobs_at_mail.boisestate.edu)
Date: 01/21/05 

Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 23:06:31 -0700

"Eric Stevens" wrote...
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 20:07:31 -0700, "Tedd Jacobs"
> <Jacobs@mail.boisestate.edu> wrote:
>
>>
>>"I.E_Johansson" wrote...
>>>
>>> "Doug Weller" <dweller@ramtops.removethisdemon.co.uk> skrev i
>>> meddelandet
>>> news:dgovu0tevvdikh1rcm4pgqv3s8frji7hnc@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:01:57 GMT, in sci.archaeology, Alan Crozier
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >Martyn is blatantly ignoring the old dictum "Absence of evidence is
>>>> >not
>>>> >evidence of absence" and drawing a fallacious conclusion from an
>>> argumentum
>>>> >ex silentio. Consider how little has actually survived from ancient
>>> Egypt, a
>>>> >tiny fraction of all the evidence that may once have existed. It is
>>>> >wrong
>>> to
>>>> >infer from this absence of evidence that, during the several millennia
>>>> >of
>>>> >Egyptian history, there was no contact at all with other parts of the
>>> world,
>>>> >or indeed the universe.
>>>>
>>>> I've never understood that 'old dictum'.
>>>> Absence of evidence is in fact evidence of absence. Not proof, but
>>>> evidence of the probability of absence. And how likely that is depends
>>>> upon the context.
>>>
>>> No Doug,
>>> you are completely wrong here.
>>[...]
>>
>>there is an absence of evidence that individual 'A' has an intellect, thus
>>we have evidence that individual 'A' has no intellect.
>
> You have no evidence that my nextdoor neighbour has an intellect. Does
> that mean that my next door neighbour has no intellect?

i have no evidence that your nextdoor neighbor exists, let alone posesses an
intellect.

>
> I know that Bishop Berkely would argue that that is the case as far as
> he is concerned.

irish empericism kant be radical!! 

-- 
A man said to the universe:
"Sir, I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation."
Loading