[MD] Philosophy is deadly

[Ian Glendinning]

In fact a corollary.

Causation is the easiest explanation for anything, unfortunately it's
a fallacy - so it's not a very high quality explanation.

(Great to get back to the real issues on MD.)

Ian

On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Ian Glendinning
<ian.glendinning at gmail.com> wrote:
> John, Andre, DMB,
>
> You say you are convinced where I said I wasn't John, but this is just
> word play.
>
> I agree with you. Causation isn't better explained. It's better
> dropped as being "a fallacy".
>
> Increasing value is a better empirical view than causation, but this
> isn't any easier to explain (eg to a MoQish judge)
>
> Ian
>
> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 8:43 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ian and Andre, I am convinced.
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:09 PM, Andre Broersen <andrebroersen at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>  Ian to dmb:
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced that Pirsig's replacement of causation between
>>> objects with patterns of preference involving conceptual patterns
>>> actually makes the explanation of causation any easier.
>>>
>>>
>> I came across this problem my freshman year of high school.  I wrote about
>> it as a subject for an English class, and sort of expected some interest or
>> intrigue from my teacher over what I termed "the fallacy of cause and
>> effect".  All he wrote on the top of my paper was that my "Hume-ian stance
>> wouldn't get me very far if I was ever brought up before a judge for
>> "causing" an accident.
>>
>>
>