Re: My top-down strategy is now 100% complete.

From: Tennessee Leeuwenburg (
Date: Thu Mar 17 2005 - 01:37:35 MST

Hash: SHA1

Marc Geddes wrote:
| Tennessee Leeuwenburg said>>>
|>I saw immediate parallels between the
|>inductive/deductive dichotomy
|>which you identified in your philosophy, and the
|>System dichotomy which I identify in mine.
| Sorry, my ideas have nothing in common with yours. A
| vague fuzzy idea like what you had does not make a
| theory. People on SL4 have flamed me enough times in
| the past for blurting out vague fuzzy ideas here.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but I still think there is a
similarity. You presented to the list no more than a fuzzy idea
yourself, with no links to anything more detailed. The above sentence is
nothing more than a claim, with no argument in it. However, if you
merely want to distance yourself from supporting my ideas, fine.

| My inductive/deductive division is not a 'Dialectic'
| like your intuition/reason. Instead it's a synergy.
| I hopefully clarified this in my previous post: I have
| two systems of reasoning: one for reasoning about
| morals/values/agents, the other for reasoning about
| physics/inanimate things. But both are systems of
| reasoning. Just in cazse you're interested, here are
| some more of the synergistic pairs in my theory:
| Heath-Happiness
| Altruism-Growth
| Eudaimonia-Volition
| Explanation-Perception
| Pattern-Meaning
| Coherence-Causality

I don't think that I am, in my mind, at all mistaken about what you are
doing with your system. Neither do I think you are mistaken about my
ideas. I do, however, think you mis-understood what I was trying to say
to the list. I'm not going to bother going further into it - I think we
are talking at cross-purposes.

- -Tennessee
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird -


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:50 MDT