Path: news.net.uni-c.dk!sunsite.dk!newsfeed1.uni2.dk!news.algonet.se!algonet!newsfeed1.bredband.com!bredband!news.tele.dk!195.224.53.60!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!gxn.net!cygnus.co.uk!not-for-mail From: aph@redhat.invalid Newsgroups: comp.ai.neural-nets,comp.lang.apl,comp.lang.awk,comp.lang.beta,comp.lang.cobol,comp.lang.dylan,comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: Einstein's Riddle Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 00:18:09 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Lines: 27 Message-ID: <98p1o1$4iu$1@localhost.localdomain> References: <3AACB567.A59B8497@Azonic.co.nz> <3AACE6CF.7F05484D@ieee.org> <0W8r6.178$fo5.14165@news.get2net.dk> <3AAD60F3.120F284A@ieee.org> <3AAE371A.2F9F596F@brazee.net> <98m43a$fe2$1@localhost.localdomain> <3AAEAD1A.BCDE11DB@ix.netcom.com> <98mugg$2mj$1@news.igs.net> <3AAF13CA.C7EA3113@ix.netcom.com> <98nlos$d2n$1@news.igs.net> <3AAF97B3.A7C7B34D@ix.netcom.com> <98o7q6$vcn$2@localhost.localdomain> <3AAFC09F.5240EEDB@ieee.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: viagra.cambridge.redhat.com X-Trace: localhost.localdomain 984615489 4702 172.16.18.77 (15 Mar 2001 00:18:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@localhost.localdomain NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 00:18:09 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: tin/1.4.4-20000803 ("Vet for the Insane") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.16-22 (i686)) Xref: news.net.uni-c.dk comp.ai.neural-nets:67598 comp.lang.apl:29417 comp.lang.awk:17192 comp.lang.beta:12778 comp.lang.cobol:102690 comp.lang.dylan:24201 comp.lang.forth:78605 In comp.lang.forth Jerry Avins wrote: : aph@redhat.invalid wrote: :> :> In comp.lang.forth J Thomas wrote: :> : Saying there is no difference unless you can tell the difference is a :> : fallacy. :> :> It's a valid philosophical position. It may not be one with which you :> agree, but that doesn't make it fallacious. : It would be more defensible to claim that if there is no way for anyone : to discern a difference, then there is none. Otherwise, one must adopt : the uncomfortable position that some things that are -- not seem, but : _are_ -- identical for me are distinguishable by you. Um, no. If you could prove to me that you could tell the difference in a blind test then I would have to admit that there really was one, even if I couldn't see it myself. Having proof of a third party's observation is just as good. I realize that I may have misread your statement. In colloquial English, I read your sentence as "saying there is no difference unless *one* can tell the difference is a fallacy." Now I'm not sure you meant that. In British English, people often say "you" when they mean "one". Andrew.