mererdog Posted January 28, 2018 Report Share Posted January 28, 2018 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." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.