Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (5040)	2/6/2001 6:33:05 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Now Karen- you miscast what I said. I am not annoyed by our ability to generalize- it can be very productive. I ONLY require that we own up to it, I am annoyed by doing it and not owning up to it- that is all.

To: Lane3 who wrote (5040)	2/6/2001 7:03:26 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"all logical arguments have to start with assumptions" I don't think so. I think they start with facts and observations upon which we make assumptions and projections and calculations, etc Then you are assuming at least that your observations have any connection to actual reality. You have to assume the facts are accurate or if you are measureing them yourself that the measurements are accurate. Depending on the exact specific argument I could probably point out other assumptions. You even have to assume that you are not hallucinating everything your senses tell you is true. I will grant that assumption. I think it is almost definitly true. It is such a low level assumption that most people do not even think about it. So you are making assumptions, you need the assumptions to base your arguments on (if not directly then to base arguments that would prove your premises). You can however claim that your assumptions are uncontroversial. If everyone accepts your assumptions then you can use them to make a convincing logical arguement. You can then turn around an say not everyone accepts my assumptions (and in particular you do not), so you are unconvinced by my argument. Lets talk again about something else. Any ideas? How about last night's Boston Public. A teacher had an affair with an 18 year old student and was forced to resign. A friend of his, who knew about the affair and tried to talk the teacher out of it, tried to explain to the administrator that the teacher that was having the affair didn't know the girl went to that High School when the affair started. The administrator then fired the 2nd teacher on the spot for not reporting the affair. My question - 1. Would this be likely to happen, my understanding is that in most public schools firing a teacher is very difficult. 2. Should it happen? Should the second teacher have been fired for not reporting it? Tim