Re: answers for George Greene
From: mitch (aatuckpointing_at_sbcglobal.net)
Date: 10/16/04
- Next message: Daniel T.: "Re: Gettier Problems"
- Previous message: Daniel T.: "Re: Gettier Problems"
- In reply to: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Next in thread: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Reply: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:39:30 GMT
"George Greene" <greeneg@cs.unc.edu> wrote in message
> Finally, two more basic points about intellectual hygiene,
> which your ignorant ass SHOULD have taken to hear the LAST time:
> 1) appeal to authority IS A FALLACY.
Verifying the historical record of fact is not an appeal to authority.
> 2) You need to put a DATE
...on your conscious choice to be ignorant?
Do you want me to quote Boolos instead? Is that current enough?
Unfortunately, I do not have my "Logic, Logic, Logic" on hand. But, even
Boolos states that Frege did not make his case against Kant. That is in the
very book that you cite as authoritative.
I would like to say that you are pathetic. Nevertheless, I do understand
your questions about first-order logic. You are more insightful than your
vulgar etiquette suggests.
Thank you for some of your other comments. You confuse the redirection of a
problem with the solution of a problem, however.
- Next message: Daniel T.: "Re: Gettier Problems"
- Previous message: Daniel T.: "Re: Gettier Problems"
- In reply to: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Next in thread: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Reply: George Greene: "Re: answers for George Greene"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|