Blame, Tame, or All The Same Games


Recommended Posts

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."

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.
 
 
Some of us know about real shepherds.  They kill their sheep, eat their flesh and wear their skins -- after a lifetime of fleecing.     :D
Link to post
Share on other sites
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.     :D

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?

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.