Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?
From: Philip Deitiker (Donevenask_at_worlnet.att.net)
Date: 01/21/05
- Next message: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Interesting archeological discovery - Emperor Qin's tomb"
- Previous message: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Meaning of Zero and All, Application to archaeology"
- In reply to: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Next in thread: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Reply: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 07:24:36 GMT
Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz> says in
news:9s11v0dgj7ttegsre2c66lsonsjor326bt@4ax.com:
> 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 thought your next door neighbor worked for the CIA
Central Intelligence agency. He would have to be an oxymoron not to
have an intellect. ;^).
-- Philip - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ____Groups_____ Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/ Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/ Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/ Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/ ____Sites_____ Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/ Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
- Next message: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Interesting archeological discovery - Emperor Qin's tomb"
- Previous message: Philip Deitiker: "Re: Meaning of Zero and All, Application to archaeology"
- In reply to: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Next in thread: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Reply: Eric Stevens: "Re: New subjectline: Valid and invalid arguments; former: Cocaine in ancient Egypt?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]