Blame, Tame, or All The Same Games

[mererdog]

On 1/26/2018 at 8:58 AM, Key said:

In a way, it still proves the point. One is not without the other. Without one, nothing is set in motion, acted upon or not.

Inferring from the specific to the general and back is problematic. When induction leads to words like "nothing" and "everything," "always" and "never," I think of Bertrand Russell...

"Domestic animals expect food when they see the person who usually feeds them. We know that all these rather crude expectations of uniformity are liable to be misleading. The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken."

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, mererdog said:

Inferring from the specific to the general and back is problematic. When induction leads to words like "nothing" and "everything," "always" and "never," I think of Bertrand Russell...

"Domestic animals expect food when they see the person who usually feeds them. We know that all these rather crude expectations of uniformity are liable to be misleading. The man who has fed the chicken every day throughout its life at last wrings its neck instead, showing that more refined views as to the uniformity of nature would have been useful to the chicken."

 

 

That's a good one.  We can also quote Scripture to the same effect.

 

Psalm 23:1

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.

In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations

 

 

Some of us know about real shepherds.  They kill their sheep, eat their flesh and wear their skins -- after a lifetime of fleecing.     

[mererdog]

18 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

Some of us know about real shepherds.  They kill their sheep, eat their flesh and wear their skins -- after a lifetime of fleecing.     

Not really. Some shepherds let their sheep die of old age, never eat their flesh, and do not wear their skin. The sheep produce both wool and milk, which are valuable enough to those shepherds.

You are falling prey to The Problem of Induction I mentioned earlier- making assumptions about a group based on observations of a part of the group then using a rule based on those assumptions to judge an individual member of that group. Not all Jews are rich, you dig?

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

34 minutes ago, mererdog said:

Not really. Some shepherds let their sheep die of old age, never eat their flesh, and do not wear their skin. The sheep produce both wool and milk, which are valuable enough to those shepherds.

You are falling prey to The Problem of Induction I mentioned earlier- making assumptions about a group based on observations of a part of the group then using a rule based on those assumptions to judge an individual member of that group. Not all Jews are rich, you dig?

 

If I were a sheep, I would be checking the shepherd's breath, to see what he's been eating.  I would also be watching his wardrobe.  Things become cliche for a reason.

[Kingfisher]

On 1/25/2018 at 6:35 AM, Key said:

To make a choice, is also to judge.

 

If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

[Key]

11 hours ago, Kingfisher said:

 

If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice.

Yes, and still a judgement made.