Me:
> Do you wish to prove the distinction between
> statement and argument?
Brian:
> There's nothing to prove: it's a matter of
> definition.
It's an assumption that statement and argument are
in different classes. I would argue that the
distinction is unnecessary, so yes, it would be
up to you to show why this is absurd.
However, I know that you can't do this because
to distinguish statement from argument is a matter
of existence itself and how each of us choose to
perceive it. Logic can't logically prove the basis on
which it proves things!
So, in the absence of a proof or definition of
existence, Logic becomes more a matter of belief
system. Logically, we must understand that Logic
is merely a _subset_ of the larger universe since
there is no way to prove that somewhere in the
universe Logic doesn't hold.
With that mindset, everything becomes a "relative
truth" which may be evaluated between 0 and 100
percent. This is simply a different way of looking
at Logic. I may use different terms for things but
the results are the same as yours.
On whether there is a distinction between statement
and argument:
> Hardly, since the following argument is valid:
>
> All giraffes are pink with purple polka-dots.
> gLeN is a giraffe.
> Therefore gLeN is pink with purple polka-dots.
>
> It seems likely that none of the individual
> statements is true, however.
Fine, but my question is broader here. I'm asking
whether the distinction is truely necessary. I mean,
we may notice that people have different skin tones
but this doesn't mean that the distinction between
those of light skin and those of dark skin is a
relevant one.
In your above, I can see that the first statement is
'almost absolutely' false. Truthfully, so to speak,
I have never been in close proximity to a giraffe,
nor could I prove that it exists in the most
fundamental sense, so I have to settle for "almost
absolutely" because I perceive it to be true based
on my experiences :)
Since the first statement is reasonably certain to
be false, the conclusion is 'relatively untrue' as a
whole. It is not an optimal conclusion and is
therefore dismissed.
= gLeN
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com