Messages in this thread | | | From | "Watson, Craig" <> | Subject | RE: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM] | Date | Fri, 27 Jun 2003 08:08:12 -0700 |
| |
[snip] > > I evaluate the argument based upon its merits. If > I'm not competent to evaluate the argument on its > merits, I'm not competent to have an opinion at all. > Essentially, you're arguing that ad hominem is a valid > reasoning tool, even to reject arguments in which you > see no flaw. [snip]
The problem here goes back as far as Plato and his cave. Some have "seen the light" (not just the shadows) having been in business. I'm not sure they can compete in the society of folks who haven't.
There are things involved in this argument that are too self-evident to articulate in an efficient manner without being patronizing and insulting. I think Plato was right and we will not be able to teach some that the shadows they see are only a two-dimensional reflection of reality. In their society we won't be able to frame arguments they can accept since we attach little or no importance to things they view as paramount but from a perspective based upon experience are known to be inconsequential. This is a frustrating situation for both sides.
BTW, I have run a business (sold it). I think I know where Larry is coming from and I pretty much agree. I don't know how to communicate some of these things to people who don't get it. Plato's Allegory of the Cave certainly gives a clear and accepted, illustration that experience can't always be explained to the inexperienced. Sometimes an ad-hominem "fallacy" in logic makes a valid point. Hopefully we can all agree to disagree (and let this thread die).
Craig Watson - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |