Re: virus: Re: Social Metaphysics

David McFadzean (
Fri, 19 Sep 1997 15:29:09 -0600

At 02:13 PM 9/19/97 -0700, Tim Rhodes wrote:

>I assume you put marketing, persuasion and trust in the "fraud" category.

Not if they are reasonable.

>> [4] By "fraud" I'm including fallacious arguments.
>Do you consider hypotheticals to be a form of "fraud"?

I don't know what you mean.

>What if the inconsistencies only occur under 12,000 lbs of atmospheric
>pressure? Or in a vacuum? Or at a sub-atomic or macro-cosmic level?

Logic isn't dependent on physical conditions. It holds for this and
all possible universes (in fact, that is what defines a possible universe).

>Just because water boils at 33 degrees in a vacuum doesn't mean it will in
>my kitchen. All such arguments on the list so far have this fatal
>flaw--they assume just because something is possible it will be prevalent.
>An un-glamorous error at best.

Either that or we're not talking about the same thing.

David McFadzean       
Memetic Engineer      
Church of Virus