View Single Post
Old 12-04-2005, 04:25 AM
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Logically inconsistant, my ***

Okay, I agree. I imagine most people have trouble divorcing a given position from their assumptions about how one arrives at that position. Also I think "common sense" gets in the way a lot - many people seem reluctant to challenge what they consider to be common-sense notions. And sometimes it's rhetorical; calling someone inconsistent is often a good way to push their buttons.

Sometimes two positions really can be contradictory, regardless of the chain of reasoning used to arrive at those positions. I do think the nature of the statements is relevant, because at its core I consider this a problem of communication more than anything.

To a large degree, philosophy deals with "the absolutes," even if the only "absolute" is the absence of absolutes. I think many discussions here revolve around isolating the theoretical principles that underlie situational decisions. So while I may not be justified in saying you're inconsistent regarding your position on killing, I do think I'm generally justified in asking you why you value the life of a burglar differently from the life of your child.

In poker there are many variables that depend on the situation. If those variables are all considered to be unknown, it may be impossible to determine the correct course of action. That isn't because a theoretical approach is ineffective, just because we don't have all the information. If we take all of the data into account, I believe there is usually a correct play that can be derived from theoretical principles.
Reply With Quote