Article View: sci.philosophy.tech
Article #1194Re: Do philosophers need defending?
From: Robin Faichney
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1987 16:49
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1987 16:49
30 lines
1590 bytes
1590 bytes
Summary: Expires: Sender: Followup-To: :>In article <825@klipper.cs.vu.nl> biep@cs.vu.nl (J. A. "Biep" Durieux) writes: :> :>>Now I would wish more people dug into the philosophical basis :>>of that methodology, so that they would become a little less confident in :>>yelling "it's scientifically proven!". :In article <3227@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> rjf@ukc.ac.uk (Robin Faichney) (me) writes: : :>Does this mean 'significantly less confident in a significant number of :>cases'? If so, it seems to me obviously false. If not, why say it? In article <3341@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> myers@tybalt.caltech.edu.UUCP (Bob Myers) writes: :Obviously false? Not to me. Seems quite likely to me, at least for :non-scientists. Among scientists is a different story. Absolutely. I meant scientists. I though Biep meant scientists. Not so sure now. How about it, Biep? Robin PS Maybe we should go privat/sm;i-ed cox
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3238@eagle.ukc.ac.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!ukc!eagle!rjfReferences:
<3219@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <825@klipper.cs.vu.nl> <3227@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <3341@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!mcvax!ukc!eagle!rjf From: rjf@eagle.ukc.ac.uk (Robin Faichney) Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Subject: Re: Do philosophers need defending? Message-ID: <3238@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 29-Jul-87 12:49:46 EDT Article-I.D.: eagle.3238 Posted: Wed Jul 29 12:49:46 1987 Date-Received: Sat, 1-Aug-87 08:40:17 EDT References: <3219@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <825@klipper.cs.vu.nl> <3227@eagle.ukc.ac.uk> <3341@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> Reply-To: rjf@ukc.ac.uk (Robin Faichney) Distribution: world Organization: Computing Lab, University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. Lines: 21