On knowing

Sep 09, 2004 29 Replies

This is going to get me into trouble. :)

If I've understood your use of those words correctly, you regard the ceremony as inductive and `your way' (no sarcasm intended) as deductive.

Now here's the origin of everything I've said so far: I don't believe there's any such thing as deduction ex nihilo. Everything is, necessarily, `bootstrapped' inductively.

Of course, we could be disagreeing about the induction/deduction attribution, which might make life interesting.

Cheers,

- Joel

Joel snipped-for-privacy@cindy.panacea.null.org9/10/04

09: snipped-for-privacy@panacea.null.org

Yes.

Works both ways at once. And -- no sarcasm intended here either -- therein lies the cosmic joke.

Ex nihilo? I'm going to reread my Dostoyevsky.

Attribution. Good word.

Michael

Uno. This is 2003, not 1912 :)

Alex.

Would you %$#^ing leave Fyodor Michailovitch out of this?

Alex.

Alex Chaihorsky1Ai0d.13865$ snipped-for-privacy@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com9/10/04

10: snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.com

Where's Prince Mishkin when you needs him? Michael

Please count me in on the thread too if it goes offline as I will also need a translator next year...

Mike

Mike Petro snipped-for-privacy@pu-erh.net

formatting link
remove the "filter" in my email address to reply

Great yin yang debate. I enjoy every minute sitting on the sidelines. I've been in Chinese restaurants where they bring you the gongfu set. They bring you chopsticks. Good luck Occidental. If you watch the chop socky genre closely the Chinese defeat the Japanese because they're more adaptive less ritualistic. The best scene in all ma movies is a favorite of Tarantino, Street Fighter with Sonny Chiba where you see an xray view of a karate blow driving skull and neck between collar bone. My personal favorite the anti hero Zatoichi from the sixties. Did anyone see the lastest version? I didn't care for the promo with the moonlite eyes.

Jim

I snip because I can

You're in, buddy.

Sasha.

Michael Plant wrote"

As usual, Michael is obfuscating the situation by introducing nugatory complexities. The relevant epistemological paradigm is not inductive/deductive, but infusive/extractive.

-DM

I honestly can't quite picture that, so I'm interested in any elaboration you can offer. Feel free to take this offline; it's getting a little too OT.

Cheers,

- Joel

Join the Discussion

Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.

Didn't find your answer?

Ask the community — no account required