RE: virus: Studying Ad Populem

From: Jonathan Davis (hidden@lucifer.com)
Date: Mon Sep 29 2003 - 17:59:41 MDT

  • Next message: Keith Henson: "Re:virus: The Ideohazard cum socio-hazard..."

    [quote from: Hermit on 2003-09-29 at 17:43:17]
    [Kalkor] So, where would an argument such as, \"His work is not regarded as exceptional by any significant academic group and his character is viewed as flawed.\" fit into our scheme? On the one hand, since it's an academic in discussion, whether he's viewed as correct by the rest of academia is surely relevant. On the other hand, not being regarded as exceptional does not necessarily imply being regarded as substandard (argumentum ad ignorantiam). Furthermore, would the argument \"his character is viewed as flawed (by an
    academic group),\" have ANY relevance to any discussion other than about the character of a man?

    [Hermit] Blunderov nailed it again with one of his beautifully short, clear summations.

    One has to laugh at you...err...donkey boy/Hermit!

    Here Kalkor has just skewerd your point and you celebrate.

    Th summary of your post relevant to Scruton was that authority or popularity are pretty much all that count.

    I will enjoy reminding you next time you post another madcap "plan" or story-rant or whatever, that you are not tenured, and your works not subject to proper peer review and that you are a figure of hate/pity for some and that you have been mocked and skewered in your microcosmic noosphere (the CoV) etc etc etc.

    Appeals to merit will be referred to this and other of your posts.

    Regards

    Jonathan

    ----
    This message was posted by Jonathan Davis to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS.
    <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29369>
    ---
    To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 29 2003 - 18:00:54 MDT