Murray B. Posted November 21, 2006 Report Posted November 21, 2006 It has been said that there is a dichotomy between arts and science but I have observed a tetrachotmy. ................................|...uses valid arguments..|...uses invalid arguments...........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- science training.......|...chemists, physicists.....|...environmentalists, biologists...| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- no science training..|...philosophers................|...lawyers, historians..................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Communications between people in different quadrants has always been difficult but perpaps never more so than between valid with science and invalid without. Climatologists (Physicists) have been ignored by politicians (Lawyers) for years. This is how we got legislation to double the fuel consumed by cars in the mid-seventies and the two recessions that followed. The recessions were not just numbers but harmed millions of North Americans for no valid reason. What can be done to improve these communications before we shoot the economy in the head? Quote
Higgly Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 At last, an original thinker! Where are you going to put the politicians? Or is that covered with the lawyers? Quote "We have seen the enemy and he is us!". Pogo (Walt Kelly).
August1991 Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 This is fun. ................................|...uses formatting ......|...uses invalid formatting..........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- right wing..................|...Charles Anthony.....|...Argus.....................................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- left wing....................|...Riverwind................|...Jerryiatric............ .....| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote
jbg Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 It has been said that there is a dichotomy between arts and science but I have observed a tetrachotmy.................................|...uses valid arguments..|...uses invalid arguments...........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- science training.......|...chemists, physicists.....|...environmentalists, biologists...| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- no science training..|...philosophers................|...lawyers, historians..................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Communications between people in different quadrants has always been difficult but perpaps never more so than between valid with science and invalid without. Climatologists (Physicists) have been ignored by politicians (Lawyers) for years. This is how we got legislation to double the fuel consumed by cars in the mid-seventies and the two recessions that followed. The recessions were not just numbers but harmed millions of North Americans for no valid reason. What can be done to improve these communications before we shoot the economy in the head? I'm a lawyer who's interested in history. Are my arguments thus unscientific and invalid? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Charles Anthony Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 I'm a lawyer who's interested in history. Are my arguments thus unscientific and invalid?No. You would fit in the |...uses invalid formatting..........| category. Quote We do not have time for a meeting of the flat earth society. << Où sont mes amis ? Ils sont ici, ils sont ici... >>
Argus Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 This is fun.................................|...uses formatting ......|...uses invalid formatting..........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- right wing..................|...Charles Anthony.....|...Argus.....................................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- left wing....................|...Riverwind................|...Jerryiatric............ .....| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- And just what's wrong with my formatting? Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Hydraboss Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 August, I couldn't help but notice that in your post the left wing has less "......"'s. Would it be possible for the right wing to transfer some "...."'s over to the have-not left wing in order for everyone to have the same level of representation? It just seems unfair to Riverwind, and I'm sure that Gerry will claim that it is all an underhanded plan by Harper. Let's head this off at the pass. Just a thought. Quote "racist, intolerant, small-minded bigot" - AND APPARENTLY A SOCIALIST (2010) (2015)Economic Left/Right: 8.38 3.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.13 -1.23
cybercoma Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 I need some clarification on how lawyers and biologists use invalid arguments... Quote
Figleaf Posted November 22, 2006 Report Posted November 22, 2006 It has been said that there is a dichotomy between arts and science but I have observed a tetrachotmy.................................|...uses valid arguments..|...uses invalid arguments...........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- science training.......|...chemists, physicists.....|...environmentalists, biologists...| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- no science training..|...philosophers................|...lawyers, historians..................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bilge. I've seen plenty of yer 'valid argument' types make completely erroneous arguments and vice versa. Quote
Murray B. Posted December 6, 2006 Author Report Posted December 6, 2006 I'm a lawyer who's interested in history. Are my arguments thus unscientific and invalid? Do you make arguments against a person on a regular basis? Are you skilled in Chemistry and/or Physics or otherwise use the scientific methods as described in many court documents? Your truthful answers will determine the quadrant of classification. Most historians and most lawyers do occupy the same quadrant which makes common interests irrelevant. Quote
Technocrat Posted December 6, 2006 Report Posted December 6, 2006 It has been said that there is a dichotomy between arts and science but I have observed a tetrachotmy.................................|...uses valid arguments..|...uses invalid arguments...........| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- science training.......|...chemists, physicists.....|...environmentalists, biologists...| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- no science training..|...philosophers................|...lawyers, historians..................| ................................-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Communications between people in different quadrants has always been difficult but perpaps never more so than between valid with science and invalid without. Climatologists (Physicists) have been ignored by politicians (Lawyers) for years. This is how we got legislation to double the fuel consumed by cars in the mid-seventies and the two recessions that followed. The recessions were not just numbers but harmed millions of North Americans for no valid reason. What can be done to improve these communications before we shoot the economy in the head? So under genetics is completely bunk as its tied to biology... wow. Stupidity all around... yay lol perhaps your a 'Scientologist' have fun jumping on Opra's couch. Quote
Slavik44 Posted December 6, 2006 Report Posted December 6, 2006 So Murray B. you are a Historian? Quote The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. - Ayn Rand --------- http://www.politicalcompass.org/ Economic Left/Right: 4.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.54 Last taken: May 23, 2007
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.