klick@ihuxu.UUCP (06/06/83)
(This was originally submitted on 6/2, but apparently
never got onto the net.)
Since many people have indicated a complete lack
of understanding of the point of my previous submission,
I see that subtleties of argument are wasted here.
My point was simply that it is fallacious to use a
phrase from one country's legal system as a logical
basis for an argument, as Tim Maroney did. Legal systems
do not define logic.
[To cbostrum: Being insulting because you do not understand
something is very childish.]
Vickie Klick
Bell Labs
ihuxu!klicktim@unc.UUCP (06/10/83)
Since many people have indicated a complete lack of
understanding of the point of my previous submission, I
see that subtleties of argument are wasted here. My
point was simply that it is fallacious to use a phrase
from one country's legal system as a logical basis for an
argument, as Tim Maroney did. Legal systems do not de-
fine logic. [To cbostrum: Being insulting because you
do not understand something is very childish.]
It isn't lack of understanding, Vickie. It is an intolerance for
slipshod reasoning that exists only to justify the preconceptions
of the arguer. Why don't you go back and take a quick look at
the original article you replied to?
Have you done that, or do you just know you're right, so there is
no need to confuse yourself with evidence? I'll assume the form-
er. As you can see, I used the judicial precept of "innocence
until guilt is proven" only as an example of the much larger
principle of "the burden of proof rests on the claimant". I used
this in order to clarify my point, not just as extra target space
for someone to snipe into if they didn't like the sound of my im-
plications. Furthermore, that this is the case is obvious from
the context.
You have deliberately distorted my argument; the only alternative
is that you have totally missed a completely clear and obvious
point. I am not saying that the point had to have been agreed
with, but you betray every sign of not even knowing what the dis-
cussion is about. Is this hypocrisy or stupidity?
(By the way, I would not be so rude with someone who has not
crassly insulted a number of people for their own foolish mis-
take. Being insulting just because you do not understand
something is childish. If you want to be treated well, treat
people well. Isn't there something like that in the Gospels?)
Tim Maroney