| |
 |
|
|
Science Forum Index » Logic Forum » An open letter to John Jones...
Page 1 of 1
|
| Author |
Message |
| Colin... |
 Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 9:21 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Dear Mr. Jones:
Why do you insist on wasting everyone's (and that includes your own)
time by posting to sci.logic, when there are so many other newsgroups
better suited to your interests?
There are 1161 Google Groups related to philosophy. These include such
general groups as alt.philosophy, alt.philosophy.debate,
talk.philosophy.misc, as well as alt.philosophy.kant (which is all
about -- you guessed it! -- Kant), and newsgroups like Continental
Philosophy and UCSB Continental Philosophy (which -- you guessed it!
-- are all about continental philosophy).
Wouldn't it make more sense for you to post to such groups as the
above, where your posts can be read by, and you can respond to and
interact with, like-minded people who share your philosophical
interests? Rather than post to sci.logic -- a newsgroup unrelated to
your philosophical interests -- only to be greeted by derision and
hostility? What is it that you're trying to accomplish by posting to
sci.logic, given that you are, in fact, greeted by such derision and
hostility? What do you get out of it? What do you hope to gain?
Sincerely,
Colin Oakes |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jan Burse... |
| Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:48 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Colin schrieb:
Quote: There are 1161 Google Groups related to philosophy. These include such
general groups as alt.philosophy, alt.philosophy.debate,
talk.philosophy.misc, as well as alt.philosophy.kant (which is all
about -- you guessed it! -- Kant), and newsgroups like Continental
Philosophy and UCSB Continental Philosophy (which -- you guessed it!
-- are all about continental philosophy).
alt.beginners.logic
alt.cancopypaste.from.philosophy.books |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marshall... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:02 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Jun 22, 12:53 pm, "Jesse F. Hughes" <je... at (no spam) phiwumbda.org> wrote:
Quote:
Can you direct me to some publications from the "rest of the logical
world"? Because I haven't seen *any* articles in logic (from America
or elsewhere) that resemble your deranged twitterings in the least.
Which journals specialize in this approach to logic?
Good grief, Mr. Hughes: your very request shows you have
completely misread the intent and value of Mr. Jones's
intellectual contributions. "The best logicians have always built
their logics on such preformal studies and investigations."
What are publications or articles next to that? Do not go gentle
into that good night. Recall Jones's rebuke to Mr. Ullrich, to
the effect that actually *reading* Godel's formal proof would
make a mockery of everything Godel was up to. Rage, rage
against the dying of the light.
But since you ask so sincerely, I will give you a clue. Jones's
intellectual peers are not to be found among those pedestrian
intellects as publish in the Journal of Symbolic Logic. Rather,
we should look to artists such as John Cage and Marcel
Duchamp. Indeed, the feelings inspired by Jones's writing
are very much the same as those I get when contemplating
Duchamp's masterwork, "Fountain." Jones's true worth can
also be said to spring from the same source as the melody
of John Cage's famous 4'33". Just be sure not to confuse
John Cage the composer with Johnny Cage from
Mortal Kombat.
And remember: a castle may have both ballisters and balusters.
If all this makes you dizzy and you need help steadying yourself,
you may reach for the latter, provided you stay just out of reach
of the former. When done, please write up your insights in the form
of a villanelle. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Marshall |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| John Jones |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:49 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 26 Oct 2004
Posts: 4263
|
Colin wrote:
Quote: Dear Mr. Jones:
Why do you insist on wasting everyone's (and that includes your own)
time by posting to sci.logic, when there are so many other newsgroups
better suited to your interests?
There are 1161 Google Groups related to philosophy. These include such
general groups as alt.philosophy, alt.philosophy.debate,
talk.philosophy.misc, as well as alt.philosophy.kant (which is all
about -- you guessed it! -- Kant), and newsgroups like Continental
Philosophy and UCSB Continental Philosophy (which -- you guessed it!
-- are all about continental philosophy).
Wouldn't it make more sense for you to post to such groups as the
above, where your posts can be read by, and you can respond to and
interact with, like-minded people who share your philosophical
interests? Rather than post to sci.logic -- a newsgroup unrelated to
your philosophical interests -- only to be greeted by derision and
hostility? What is it that you're trying to accomplish by posting to
sci.logic, given that you are, in fact, greeted by such derision and
hostility? What do you get out of it? What do you hope to gain?
Sincerely,
Colin Oakes
Devotees of the late welsh bard Dylan Thomas (so often pronounced
"dilan" with a short "i", rather than the correct enunciation of "dulun"
with two short "u's") might be tempted to make the response that Dylan
himself made when asked to describe his health, and find this missive as
“stereoraceous, lateritic, phthisic, mephitic, canicular”.
Following that temptation would not be without merit. We need only
remind ourselves that the battles of the analytic/continental divide
still rage fiercely and that some of the most fundamentalist positions
can be found among the royal guard of the American schools of logic.
Times have moved on since the formal fundamentalism of the Vienna circle
but one would be entitled to wonder whether the American's have caught
on to that, or indeed whether they can lay claim to be logicians in the
full sense of the word with their distaste or even rejection of logical
foundations.
While it would be out of place to describe Americanised logic as an
extension of accountancy, computing, video-game architecture and other
technical pursuits, their pragmatic directives are pretty much alike. In
the meantime, the rest of the logical world simply carries on without
them, mindfully staying just out of reach of the ballisters that operate
furiously behind their castle walls. |
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| Jesse F. Hughes... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:53 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
John Jones <jonescardiff at (no spam) aol.com> writes:
Quote: While it would be out of place to describe Americanised logic as an
extension of accountancy, computing, video-game architecture and other
technical pursuits, their pragmatic directives are pretty much alike. In
the meantime, the rest of the logical world simply carries on without
them, mindfully staying just out of reach of the ballisters that operate
furiously behind their castle walls.
Can you direct me to some publications from the "rest of the logical
world"? Because I haven't seen *any* articles in logic (from America
or elsewhere) that resemble your deranged twitterings in the least.
Which journals specialize in this approach to logic?
Much thanks.
--
Jesse F. Hughes
"The sole cause of all human misery is the inability of people
to sit quietly in their rooms." -- Blaise Pascal |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Jesse F. Hughes... |
| Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:03 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Marshall <marshall.spight at (no spam) gmail.com> writes:
Quote: Good grief, Mr. Hughes: your very request shows you have
completely misread the intent and value of Mr. Jones's
intellectual contributions.
[...]
Quote: When done, please write up your insights in the form
of a villanelle. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
I must say, it bothers me a bit just how well you ape Jones's writing
and philosophy.
--
"I'm starting to absorb information [...] as I find myself more and
more fascinated by my own prime counting function. The rate of
information absorption is on an exponential scale, like it always has
been for me for things I'm interested in." -- James S. Harris |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
|
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:04 am
|
|