🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <RJC.92Nov19173454@daiches.cogsci.ed.ac.uk> 
rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Caley) writes:

>In article <1992Nov18.134406.17573@husc3.harvard.edu>, 
>Michael Zeleny writes:

MZ:
>>You are not even close.  The point is that a *correct* and
>>*comprehensive* normative description will _ipso facto_ have full
>>descriptive adequacy. 

RC:
>And a contradiction implies anything, and if you hypothesise a
>completely implausible object you can ascribe whatever properties you
>like to it.

When Russell saw a contradiction in Frege's logicist program, he
produced a proof, instead of blowing hot air.  If your objections to
Montague's research program has any more weight than your subjective
judgment of implausibility, I would like to hear about it; otherwise
don't expect me to continue this exercise in futility by responding to
your inane and vacuous taunts.

MZ:
>>Ah, "philosophy at Harvard"... thank you for answering my query about
>>the state of scholarship at the University of Geneva [etc.]

RC:
>Ad hominem as `rationalism'. Hm, what a novel idea. Can we have
>sticking your tongue out at people as nominalism next. :-)

Richard, we have been at it long enough for you to overcome your
learning disability and realize that I only resort to _ad hominem_
remarks to reciprocate in kind.  By the way, I am still waiting for
you to come up with those artillery batteries you offered me over a
year ago.

>--
>rjc@cogsci.ed.ac.uk				_O_
>						 |<

cordially,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Le cul des femmes est monotone comme l'esprit des hommes."