| Body: |
Kent Paul Dolan wrote:
> Guy Macon wrote:
>
> > I am sane, yet I also see in the quoted phrase
> > "since long before computers with capacities
> > capable of doing any such thing were available"
> > the clear implication that such computers are
> > available now. The word "before" implies an
> > "after."
>
> Well, no, since, again, the universe is not binary,
> and there is in this case a clear ternary division;
> before, during, and after, and infinitely more
> divisions more finely spaced than that, time being a
> continuous variable.
>
> > In my opinion, your use of insults is a clear sign
> > that you don't believe that you can win the
> > argument on the basis of evidence or logic.
>
> What argument would that be? Remember the subject of
> my original posting in response to yet more flogging
> of worthless software by Arthur T. Murray.
>
> Arthur T. Murray is a well documented Usenet
> kook, who has been claiming to have "solved
> AI" since back when his solution methods
> were restricted to pencil and paper.
Might want to read what you said. Your name calling was directed at
people who read and understood the words you wrote, instead apparently
of the words that you had _intended_ to right. But that's their fault;
they're obviously "insane."
> My objection to Erik Max Francis' idiocy was
> precisely that he was attempting to argue by putting
> words in his opponent's (my) mouth, not by any basis
> of fact.
That's convenient, since 1. I wasn't even the first person to point out
the clear implication of your own poorly-chosen words, and 2. not one
person responding to your defense thought that you had meant what you
apparently intended. If no one understands your remarks, maybe it
should dawn on you that perhaps the problem communicating isn't with the
readers, but rather with the writer.
If you phrase something poorly that _no one understands to mean what you
intended_, then calling everyone else "insane" for reading your words
and not your mind is rather arrogant.
> I use insults to _anyone_ who choses the path of
> intellectual dishonesty in discussions where I am a
> participant.
The irony of you whining about "intellectual dishonesty" is a bit rich.
Hey, who was it that read your words the way you intended? Oh, right,
no one.
(Nice try to pull the discussion back to a list of newsgroups where you
probably suspect the people who were disagreeing with you don't
subscribe too -- except that I already do. Stay classy!)
--
Erik Max Francis && max@alcyone.com && http://www.alcyone.com/max/
San Jose, CA, USA && 37 18 N 121 57 W && AIM, Y!M erikmaxfrancis
We're here to preserve democracy, not to practice it.
-- Cpt. Frank Ramsey
|
