On 6/1/07, Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You mean ... because human imperfectness tends to switch off logic because humans are tempted to follow their limited horizons and perception?
that's one interpretation, which if you think is valid would make for a quite interesting dissection for a person with a certain sort of doctorate and a nice comfy couch. Another would be that the application of any rigorous logic relies fundamentally on a baseline set of clearly defined and unambiguously communicated axioms which are held as universally true by all those involved. Its very easy for people, when relating with each other..even over technical matters, to presume that the other people in the conversation hold fast to the same axiomaticly true statements as they do. Moreover, there's no guarantee that different people with conflicting points of view, each with their own set of baseline assumptions, can reconcile the conflicting assumptions through logical rigor....even if they are accurately communicated. So its not so much that people stop using logic or that people are incapable of using logic... as it is that people use a different but completely self-consistent logic and don't really take the time to see if everyone is in fundamental agreement before stomping around getting all puffed up and acting self-importante. Such miscommunications only deepen when individuals in the discussion presume (logically of course) their logic is the only correct logic and therefore everyone else is being illogical. Though at the moment, thankfully, I am at a loss to point out a specific example as someone who makes a habit of this sort of thing, I'd hate to continue to drag this conversation away from reasonably constructive discussion by pointing fingers at anyone in particular, Ralf.
I find Rahul's reaction absurd, because we are talking about technical issues and technical standards/metrics here, which I don't see any reason not to apply logic to.
To my very great dismay, my legal team has informed me that you are in fact entitled to your opinion concerning Rahul's opinion. But please Ralf, let's keep this discussion above such petty emotional outbursts. People look up to you for your logic and reason.. don't tanish that so cheaply. -jef"If I can prove to you that you don't exist, what are the chances that you'll disappear in a puff of contradictory smoke?"spaleta -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
