30-04-2004 08:34									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: How many times do I have to say it - facts obviously can be justified by an appeal to authority. "You have cancer" is an empirical, scientific fact.

And you believe there is no corresponding expertise relating to the effects of international policy? That is, no one is in a better position than anyone else to predict what may happen.

Your argument is total rubbish; as are your attempts to weasel out of admitting that you didn't really understand what an appeal to authority is.

	30-04-2004 08:39									#62
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Agathon No. More like "here are some experts in the field who have no underlying political reason to push an anti-Bush/Blair line saying that the policy is wrong. This is good reason for us to strongly consider that they may be right."

Change "that they may be" to "whethor or not they are", and it's true.

quote: What if I'd said, "It's reported that most scientists of high academic reputation who aren't funded by carbon emitting industries say that global warming is a myth"?

Global warming is a matter of empirical scientific fact. Either the earth is getting warmer or it isn't.

	30-04-2004 08:40									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Agathon And you believe there is no corresponding expertise relating to the effects of international policy? That is, no one is in a better position than anyone else to predict what may happen.

When they make a claim of empirical fact, it's OK to justify that based on the fact that they said it was true. When they make an argument, it is not.

	30-04-2004 08:52									#64
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: When they make a claim of empirical fact, it's OK to justify that based on the fact that they said it was true. When they make an argument, it is not.

You've got to be kidding me, right?

Factual claims can be used as premises in arguments.

If an expert in global warming (Professor X) gives this argument:

1) Global warming is happening and the consequences will have a catastrophic effect on human civilization.
2) We should try to avoid catastrophic consequences to human civilization.
______

C) We should do something to prevent global warming.

That's a valid argument. He's used his knowledge of the facts (premise 1) to draw a conclusion along with premise 2 (which is a commonplace which anyone could accept).

So then if I say, mentioning Professor X

1A) Professor X is an expert on climate change.
2A) Professor X says based on his expert knowledge that we should do something to prevent global warming.
______

CA We should do something to prevent global warming.

... there is no fallacious appeal to authority because he is in fact an expert.

You don't seem to understand either that factual claims can be used in arguments or that appeals to authority are not always fallacious.

Keep hitting your head against that wall and you might eventually get it.

	30-04-2004 09:00									#65
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Agathon You've got to be kidding me, right? Factual claims can be used as premises in arguments.

Where did I deny this?

quote: If an expert in global warming (Professor X) gives this argument: 1) Global warming is happening and the consequences will have a catastrophic effect on human civilization. 2) We should try to avoid catastrophic consequences to human civilization. ______ C) We should do something to prevent global warming.

Assuming 1 to be empirical scientific fact (I'll ignore that catastrophic is subjective for now), the fact that Professor X gave that argument is not justification that it's correct. The premise is assumed to be correct, but the logical steps are not assumed to be so just because an expert made them. However, in this case especially it is quite clear that those steps are correct.

Let's assume, OTOH, that the argument was made like this:

quote: 1) Global warming is happening and the consequences will have a catastrophic effect on human civilization. 2) We should try to avoid catastrophic consequences to human civilization. ______ C) We should not do something to prevent global warming.

Isn't it clear that not taking the argument on faith will result in the observation that the conclusion of the "expert" is, in fact, wrong? This of course has more significance in areas where truth or falsehood cannot be established completely (virtually all political debates).

quote: That's a valid argument. He's used his knowledge of the facts (premise 1) to draw a conclusion along with premise 2 (which is a commonplace which anyone could accept).

Yes, his argument is, in fact valid. However, the argument "we ought to do stuff against global warming because Professor X says so" is not valid.

	30-04-2004 11:12									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

But you are confusing a formal fallacy with a substantive fallacy.

The fallacy of appeal to an authority is a substantive fallacy not a formal one.

Your error is to treat it as a formal fallacy.

In fact "We should do something about Global warming, because Professor X says so" is a formally valid argument if one adds the obviously suppressed premise "We should defer to the experts in matters of expertise" and "Professor X is an expert in the relevant area". There is no formal (logical) fallacy committed by such an argument - thus it is valid in the way that logicians use when they use the term "valid".

The fallacy of an appeal to authority would occur if the premise "Professor X is an expert in the relevant area" was false. But that wouldn't mean that the argument wasn't logically valid, just that it wasn't sound. The very same argument (which is valid come what may, since validity is a property of arguments independent of the truth conditions of their premises) can commit the fallacy depending on whether or not PX is an expert.

Your idea that "the logical steps are not correct" was clearly made in ignorance of the fact that what is being talked about here is a substantive fallacy and not a formal one. We can make the "logical steps correct" and still commit the fallacy.

Now if you want to argue over whether we should ever take an expert's view on faith, then it is obvious that we must to get anything done. But you seem to have in mind a simplistic picture of the justification.

The fact that an expert says it is not a justification for its being true, but a justification for our believing it to be true.

If we believe there are such things as experts then we believe that some people are better informed than others about certain things. If we believe that someone is an expert, then that by itself is reason to believe what they say. But that doesn't mean that what they say is not defeasible - it could be false (unless we define expertise as infallibility), but the truth is that if there are experts then they are much more likely to be right than we are - that is the basis of our confidence in experts. But even though we can't be sure that it is true it is certain that (in the absence of evidence to the contrary) we must believe it or abandon our belief that there are experts at all.

	30-04-2004 13:02									#67
	Inflate your Upload Space

Why the hell do kids think that passing Philosophy 110 qualifies them to argue about the subject with professional philosophers?

	30-04-2004 15:11									#68
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader That faked quote is a disgrace. You might consider deleting your post Tripledoc.

I see no evidence that it is a fake so far. Apparently it originated in the newspaper the Palestinian Chronicle.

If it can be proven that this general never existed as claimed by some, then it is a fake.

Ultimately all quotes can be called fakes then. And that would be rather too convenient.

	30-04-2004 15:12									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

nm

	30-04-2004 15:13									#70
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

I'd be more upset about this despicable action if it wasn't the work of a DL...

	30-04-2004 15:15									#71
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

yawn

	30-04-2004 15:27									#72
	Increase Your PM Length

Tripledoc.

That quote is defamatory.

If you do not mind opening yourself and the owners of this site to a libel action on the off chance that it may be true, fine.

Although acknowledging that you do not actually know that the foul thing is true will not help your defence.

	30-04-2004 15:28									#73
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

hmmm, I don't see much ambassador material comment here.

	30-04-2004 18:35									#74
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader Tripledoc. That quote is defamatory. If you do not mind opening yourself and the owners of this site to a libel action on the off chance that it may be true, fine. Although acknowledging that you do not actually know that the foul thing is true will not help your defence.

Well, they can sue me. The quote is placed on hundreds of sites on the internet. I found it on a remembrance page for Rachel Corey. Maybe someone should sue the owners of that site. I don't know if the quote is fake or true, but from what I know of what Sharon has done it seems plausible. Why would someone fabricate a quote, that would hurt the case? It is not that Sharon has not said or done anything that makes him less of a war criminal, than if this quote was not invented. Also why has none of the sites (all rightwing) been able to get an official denial by the Israeli government.

Also they fail to point to the person who manufactured the quote, if that is what they claim.

And also now that I quoted the quote, why should I remove it? People can judge for themselves. Should people who claimed that there were WMD in Iraq go back and erase all their arguments?

	30-04-2004 19:00									#75
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Dror Nanas:
Why I Have To Like Ariel Sharon

quote: For the first time in my life I can understand the appeal of young Germans to the Nazi party 50 years ago. I personally have a vast amount of untapped energy deep inside myself, which I can only refer to as an undirected burning anger. I think many of my peers have this same thing, probably with a different name. It has a lot to do with our age, place in society, personal confidence, testosterone, and a hundred other issues. Being in Israel, "The Homeland," stokes these internal flames. The glamour of the military, the constant threat of danger, the eminence of war, the moving stories of Zionist heroics (the Kibbutz Ayalon bullet factory, the residents of Tel Hai, Haganah, etc…) For a kid like myself, with twenty-four years of built-up passion and anger, I can easily see the appeal of the highest levels of patriotism . The longer I am here, the more I feel pulled by the right side of the political spectrum. The appeal of the militant patriotism in this country is easy to see. It is a great place to be if you want to unload some anger. They give you a gun, tell you how we've been getting our ass kicked for the last 4000 years, tell you everyone around you is your enemy, and send you off more than ready to die for your country. At least that is how I see it. It is simple here. There are good guys and there are bad guys. The bad guys want to push you into the sea and end your people. Our planet has 800 million of them and 13 million of us, but damn it, we aren't leaving without a fight! Here is something to fight for, to be passionate about, right? Those young Germans had their own reasons, which make me sick and I don't condone, but I can no longer blame them for getting sucked in, with all those sharp military uniforms everywhere and all that drama and propaganda and guns. It's getting to me, it really is. A day doesn't go by that I don't think about aliya and contemplate signing up. Am I a product of government propaganda, or is this noble and real and heroic? I cannot tell. It feels right. Is this Zionism? Are the settlers in the West Bank and Gaza in the wrong or the right? Again I can't tell, but they seem brave as hell, and they are inspiring, and I feel like they sleep better at night than I do. It is very romantic, living on the frontier. Maybe I am naive to consider real danger romantic, yet would millions of people show up to watch James Bond movies if he didn't put himself in danger? It is inherent in humanity. Everyone has a warrior inside. It is certainly appealing, so maybe I am justified in the desire to fight for this country despite the costs. I don't think I am unique in the need to live in a place where I am counted on to contribute. I want to serve something bigger than myself. What does America get from me? Sales tax? If I came to Israel to have my heart and brain constantly kicking each other in the soft tissue over issues I never before considered, every penny has been well spent. This train of thought has no room for real politics. It is not about history or biblical rights or who is Prime Minister or anything in reality. It is about what quiets the caveman inside me. I must be a lunatic to get excited over Ariel Sharon quotes or Mossad stories every time I read the Post. I must be a lunatic. I should really find a hobby soon, or the next journal entry comes from Lebanon.

http://www.israelcentersf.org/Otzma99/jrnl/dr02.html

	30-04-2004 19:16									#76
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Agathon But you are confusing a formal fallacy with a substantive fallacy.

Well, you're the philosophy expert, so I'll defer to you

	30-04-2004 19:17									#77
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Drake Tungsten Why the hell do kids think that passing Philosophy 110 qualifies them to argue about the subject with professional philosophers?

I don't. I've never taken it

	30-04-2004 19:21									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

A search of google returned the following interesting comments on "General Ouze Merham" from the quote

quote: > To follow it up: > > Searching on yahoo with the words +general +merham -sharon yields nine > hits, some in > foreign languages that I can't read: > > http://www.devrimcidemokrasi.org/gu...-29/haber10.htm > appears to be the same thing with an Sharon spelled in whatever language > that page is in. > > http://www.evrensel.net/02/04/03/kose.html > appears the same > > The rest all clearly not relevant, generally having the words general > and merham spaced too far apart to be relevant. These sites look to be Turkish. What's interesting is that the general's name appears on both pages as "Quze Merham", not "Ouze Merham" as in the English-language versions. Googling for "quze" doesn't turn up much of anything in Turkish or Arabic, but I happened across this bizarre proverb in Kurdish: -------- http://www.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~siamakr...h/Idiom/a1.html ew kIr-e me-tirs-ew, qUz-e me-lerze, be kar na-y-e this penis not-fear, vagina not-shake to work not-come We should put aside fear and face the problem bravely. -------- Checking an online dictionary, "quz" does indeed mean "vagina" in Kurdish. (The "-e" at the end of the word, known as an "ezafe", is a kind of attributive marker used in Kurdish and Persian.) The word "marham" appears in the same dictionary with the meaning of "ointment" (a borrowing from Arabic, as noted elsethread): http://people.smartchat.net.au/~jel...h/Q-shaf10.html http://people.smartchat.net.au/~jel...kh/M-shaf5.html So if I'm not mistaken, "quz-e marham" would mean "vaginal ointment" in Kurdish. I'd conjecture that the story originated with a Kurdish prankster who managed to get it printed on some Turkish sites, and that the story was subsequently vectored by English-language sources with "Quze" misspelled as "Ouze".

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g...ay.uchicago.edu

	30-04-2004 20:00									#79
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Oh dear... lol.

	30-04-2004 22:14									#80
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

On the other hand.

Merham, not marham, is a common lastname in English, Ouze is perhaps a rare name, but it is perhaps refering to a river in England. Is it true that Sharon was at a military college in Britain in 1956?

I don't know where this preoccupation with 'vaginal ointments' comes from? But I have read the thread you pasted from, and it does not seem convincing.

In any case it is far fetched that, quz-e marham, should turn from the Kurdish (?) into Ouze Merham.

However, I am willing to accept that the quote is of questionable origin. So there.

	02-05-2004 22:43									#81
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

bump

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...2/ixportal.html

	03-05-2004 00:48									#82
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Quoted:

quote: Diplomats failed to disclose their own Arab links By Chris Hastings, David Bamber and Roya Nikkhah (Filed: 02/05/2004) Some of the most prominent former diplomats who condemned Tony Blair's policies in the Middle East have business links with Arab governments, The Telegraph can reveal. In a letter published last week, 52 former British diplomats condemned the invasion of Iraq and the Government's support for Israel. Click to enlarge The letter failed to disclose, however, that several of the key signatories, including Oliver Miles, the former British ambassador to Libya who instigated the letter, are paid by pro-Arab organisations. Some of the others hold positions in companies seeking lucrative Middle East contracts, while others have unpaid positions with pro-Arab organisations. The disclosure last night prompted allegations - denied by the diplomats - that they were merely promoting the interests of their clients. Andrew Dismore, the Labour MP for Hendon, said: "If an MP had made statements like these without declaring an interest in the subject they would have been before the standards and privileges committee we would have had their guts for garters. "This casts a very different light on what the former diplomats have said." ...

	03-05-2004 00:51									#83
	Tired of ads?

Conflict of interests there?

NO LETTER WRITING FOR OIL!!!!

	03-05-2004 01:21									#84
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Sounds like they've become lobbyists

	03-05-2004 01:25									#85
	Increase Your PM Length

Ya, 52 is a nice number. Number of cards in deck (most wanted deck)

	03-05-2004 01:29									#86
	Full PM-box? Change here!

So, who is the boss of the Telegraph? Are we to dismiss the claims of the paper because it's defending the interests of the paper?

	03-05-2004 01:33									#87
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: The letter failed to disclose, however, that several of the key signatories, including Oliver Miles, the former British ambassador to Libya who instigated the letter, are paid by pro-Arab organisations.

George W. Bush is being paid by a pro-American organization. Therefore, all his statements are false.

quote: Some of the others hold positions in companies seeking lucrative Middle East contracts [...]

In other words, they would be the first to be hurt by an American withdrawal from Iraq.

quote: [...] while others have unpaid positions with pro-Arab organisations.

	03-05-2004 01:52									#88
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: George W. Bush is being paid by a pro-American organization. Therefore, all his statements are false.

And what is the name of that organization?

quote: In other words, they would be the first to be hurt by an American withdrawal from Iraq.

nice strawman.

They seek to be hired by Arab governments - not by US.

	03-05-2004 02:33									#89
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov quote: George W. Bush is being paid by a pro-American organization. Therefore, all his statements are false. And what is the name of that organization?

The American population. Bush has an pro-American bias! How dare he not disclose that.

	03-05-2004 05:11									#90
	Full PM-box? Change here!

If Poly is any indication, the American population is full of people who aren't pro-American...