Re: Just a single Question for the Candidates

[Matthias Urlichs <smurf@smurf.noris.de>]

Hi, Raul Miller wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 05, 2004 at 09:39:50PM -0500, David Nusinow wrote:
>> > I can demonstrate evidence that I'm not a gerbil quite handily.
> 
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 08:08:49AM +0000, Andrew Suffield wrote:
>> No you can't, because you're a gerbil and gerbils can't form rational
>> arguments.
> 
> If it's true that gerbils can't form rational arguments (not much doubt
> that they can't express rational arguments, but that's not your claim),
> then the mere ability to form rational arguments (or, even better express
> those arguments) qualifies as demonstrating evidence.

Umm, that logic works here because the meta-argument and the
meta-meta-argument are actually about the same topic (rational arguments).

In real-world examples, it is quite easy to sustain the Gerbil Hypothesis:
you simply assert that the conclusion the supposed gerbil arrives at is
invalid.

We've had quite a few examples of this kind of argument on -devel recently.

-- 
Matthias Urlichs