Dan Minette wrote: > > So, I don't think it is helpful to make arguments based on one's own > axiom set and then expect them to sound "reasonable" to someone who > holds a different axiom set. > Or we can hold "all" sets of axioms, assign a prior probability to each of them, then apply Bayesian analysis with real world examples and get a posteriori probability for each sets. And then decide based on some conservative criterium, like "do not kill if it's murder with 5% or more probability".
Alberto Monteiro _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
