I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.
At 12:19 PM 9/17/2005 +0930, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph,
Sorry you are puzzled - the problem could be email shorthand.
On your first response, Priest says that we can say true things about the
world in the form 'P&-P' (eg 'The sky is bl
Dear Ralph,
Sorry you are puzzled - the problem could be email shorthand.
On your first response, Priest says that we can say true things about
the world in the form 'P&-P' (eg 'The sky is blue and not blue' or
'His head is bald and not bald') - whether this counts as saying much
about represen
I am a little puzzled here. See below:
At 12:11 PM 9/16/2005 +1000, Ian Hunt wrote:
Dear Ralph,
Now I see your point - it was not clear before. (BTW "In
Contradiction" is earlier - the science and society article is based
on it but it does spell out more completely his argument). I agree
with y
materialists of old, but he seems bent on making the
same trivial points.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sep 15, 2005 4:31 AM
To: Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl
Marx and the
thinkers he inspired
Subject: Re: [
ts.
-Original Message-
From: Ian Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sep 15, 2005 4:31 AM
To: Forum for the discussion of theoretical issues raised by Karl Marx and the
thinkers he inspired
Subject: Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Graham Priest: dialectic & dialetheic
Dear Ralph,
Dear Ralph,
I wonder what the purpose of your review is? We could surely do
without the abuse (Priest and Sayers are 'philistines' etc). A little
more argument and less assertion would go a long way, as would a bit
better knowledge of Tarski's semantic theory of truth: the Tarski bit
should re
Priest, Graham. 'Dialectic and Dialetheic', Science and Society 1990, 53,
388-415.
Priest is an odd duck. He illustrates the problem of combining two
disparate enterprises: the pursuit of logic as a pure formal enterprise (in
his case paraconsistent logic, which admits of true contradictions,
