How about this? Tests show that your body has cancer. That cancer is bad for your body.
There's a value free methodology pronouncing on the value (cancer is bad) of an artifact (your body). Millions of other examples can be found, I suspect. WC --- On Fri, 11/14/08, armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: 'The value' is linguistic quicksand > To: [email protected] > Cc: "armando baeza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Friday, November 14, 2008, 9:51 AM > > Geoff wrote: > > > >> "I just don't see how a methodology which > is supposedly value-free > >> can > >> pronounce on the value of artifacts. > > > A phrase to remember, thanks, cheerskep. > mando > > On Nov 14, 2008, at 7:20 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > Too briefly: The phrase "the value" is > communication quicksand, both > > because of 'the' and because of > 'value'. The word/notion "value" > > is what > > I'll call > > "soft" as opposed to "hard" -- > i.e. it doesn't come attached to > > current or > > potential sense data. "Eiffel Tower" and > "taste of vanilla" are > > hard phrases. > > Soft, derivative phrases aren't useful without > serviceably precise > > descriptions > > of the notions behind them. > > > > The definite article 'the' both reifies and > implies there is solely > > a single > > "referent". But readers will claim there are > many different kinds > > of "value". > > This prompts Chris to an oblique half-response: > > > > "Some artifacts serve as better scientific > evidence than others > > -- that's > > how." > > > > Geoff's response to that aims to harden the phrase > a bit, but the > > exchange is > > unlikely to escape the quicksand. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ************** > > Get the Moviefone Toolbar. Showtimes, theaters, movie > news & > > more!(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/10000 > > > 0075x1212774565x1200812037/aol?redir=http://toolbar.aol.com/ > > > moviefone/downloa > > d.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000001)
