home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!paladin.american.edu!auvm!BROWNVM.BITNET!PL436000
- Message-ID: <POLITICS%92122116203083@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.politics
- Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:19:26 EST
- Sender: Forum for the Discussion of Politics <POLITICS@UCF1VM.BITNET>
- From: Jamie <PL436000@BROWNVM.BITNET>
- Subject: Logic Czar Intervenes
- Lines: 39
-
- From: Grzegorz Albinowski <caius@II.UJ.EDU.PL>
-
- >My assumptions are:
-
- >1) rightism<=>support-for-free-market \
- >nazis didn't support free market / therefore nazism is NOT rightism
-
- >You say that the following term is "widely accepted"
-
- >2) nazism=>rightism
-
- >(One person argued that nazism<=>rightism but let's ignore it)
-
- I agree, so far. (I don't agree with (1), but I agree that it
- is one of Caius's assumptions!)
-
- -------------------------------------
-
- >R <=> F and N => ~F therefore N => ~R
-
- > N => R
- --------------------------------------
- >There must be an error in these statements.
-
- Why, yes, there is an error in your assumption.
-
- >I consider N=>R (if you are a nazi you are a rightist) to be false.
-
- Yes, we know that.
-
- Look, I think this is mostly cleared up now. You simply are using
- the word "Rightist" in a non-standard way.
-
- It's as though I decided to use the word "Polish" to mean
- "ignorant Catholic despot."
-
- This method is called "dissuasive definition."
-
- Jamie
-