5HC : Skinner, Turing (fwd)

Iorwerth Thomas · 07 Feb 2005, 05:30 · from 2005-February.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: iorweththomas at hotmail.com (Iorwerth Thomas)
Date: Mon Feb  7 05:30:10 2005
Subject: (urth) 5HC : Skinner, Turing (fwd)
In-Reply-To: <BAY102-F6AC81B8CDAFEB5004A6F886710 at phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY102-F386AA87A01B0267D0A719B9730 at phx.gbl>



>From: "Chris" <rasputin_ at hotmail.com>

>I am not sure where Hume's fork comes into play here. The fork, as I 
>understand it, isn't about determinism or randomness. It's a division of 
>types of statements as either analytic (strict products of definitions and 
>logical operations) or synthetic (products of empirical observation, 
>statements about the world). Some people think this distinction is more 
>important than others; Quine, for example, argued that there was really no 
>such thing as an analytic statement in (natural) language.
>

Curses.  My memory is as bad as ever.  I'm sure I have seen it called that 
somewhere.  But you're probably right.  It is an argument I've seen 
attributed to Hume, though.

Iorwerth

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net