Argumentum e silentio

Raymond de Hoop rdehoop at keyaccess.nl
Thu Feb 22 16:32:50 EST 2001


Dave,

Not a feeble attempt at reductio ad absurdum, but a feeble attempt at humor;
see the icon after the microwave oven remark. I am sorry that we apparently
do not share the same sense of humor.

Greetings
Raymond

> Since there is no substance to this post of Raymond's but only a
> feeble attempt at reductio ad absurdum, I have nothing more to say
> on this subject.  It's clear we're getting nowhere, and I have other
> things to do.
> 
> 
>>>> You're fond of arguments from silence, aren't you?  There's more to
>>>> the Deborah story than the song, in case you didn't know.  If all
>>>> you can come up with are arguments from silence, then perhaps
>>>> you need to learn the expression "absence of evidence is not
>>>> evidence of absence."  Considering the social/governmental
>>>> position that we are told Deborah was in, it's reasonable to
>>>> conclude that there were at least some instances when she had to
>>>> write.  But apparently, arguments from silence are the best you
>>>> can muster, so I see no reason to continue this conversation.
>>>> 
>> 
>> Dave,
>> I'm glad you've analysed my postings and my scholarly work so carefully,
>> that you're able to give the judgment that I'm fond of "arguments from
>> silence". 
>> 
>> But apparently you do not know that bringing in the "argument from
>> silence"-argument is an argument from silence itself: It cannot be proven
>> that it did not exist, so it could have existed. That is the argument that
>> you are bringing in, and it's from silence itself.
>> 
>> But well, who knows, you may be correct with regard to Deborah. In your view
>> her social/governmental position justifies the conclusion that she had to
>> write occasionaly. Why do you not argue that she did not write with hand but
>> did it by computer and faxed her correspondence?
>> Computers did not exist? Argument from silence!
>> 
>> After her work she went home by car.
>> Cars did not exist? Argument from silence!
>> 
>> She came home where her husband cooked the meal in the microwave oven.
>> A microwave oven did not exist? Argument from silence!  :-)
>> 
>> For other (and certaiunly more substantive) arguments I refer to the
>> postings by Liz, Ian and David.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Raymond.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ---
>> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [dwashbur at nyx.net]
>> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
>> $subst('Email.Unsub')
>> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
>> 
> 
> 
> Dave Washburn
> http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
> "No study of probabilities inside a given frame can ever
> tell us how probable it is that the frame itself can be
> violated."  C. S. Lewis
> 
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [rdehoop at keyaccess.nl]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
> $subst('Email.Unsub')
> To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew at franklin.oit.unc.edu.
> 




More information about the b-hebrew mailing list