Re: Logic in Schools
- From: "George Dance" <georgedance04@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: 8 Jul 2005 17:19:07 -0700
Keith Ramsay wrote:
> As far as I can tell, the two of you are just phenomenally
> biased against Torkel Franzen:
>
> George Dance wrote:
> |True; but I'd much rather that someone doing a search reads something
> |like "Torkel Franzen is impervious to reasoning," rather than just
> |"Torkel Franzen wrote". I think (hope?) that makes it more likely
> |they'd actually read the piece.
>
> So what's an example of this? I've been reading him since he
> started posting to usenet. I've often seen people who thought
> that they had some very strong argument, but in fact had only
> a very weak argument, get really annoyed when he refused to
> treat it with the high respect they felt it deserved. I haven't
> seen any cases where someone actually had a compelling argument
> that he was just impervious to.
IME, he usually doesn't address any arguments (of mine or anyone
else's) - merely snips them and repeats points that have already been
addressed - hence my 'impervious to reasoning' comment. This thread
alone provides examples where he's done just that repeatedly - in fact,
that's all he's done in every single post.
Perhaps we've reading different posts of his, on different lists and
different topics.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: Torkel Franzen
- Re: Logic in Schools
- References:
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: George Dance
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: Acme Diagnostics
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: George Dance
- Re: Logic in Schools
- From: Keith Ramsay
- Re: Logic in Schools
- Prev by Date: Re: von Neumann universe
- Next by Date: Re: Interpretations and assignments.
- Previous by thread: Re: Logic in Schools
- Next by thread: Re: Logic in Schools
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
