On 29 Aug 2005, at 18:41, kurtleegod.domain.name.hidden wrote:
> [GK]
> You ARE doing something speculative whether you admit it or not!
> And I don't really have to study your argument because
> it is derived from premises that, you already admitted, are
> incompatible with the conclusions you claim.
Please explain what you mean. I have never say I got conclusions
incompatible with the premises. I would have concluded the negation
of comp. I am open that such event could occur of course, and that is
why I say my derivation shows that comp is testable. I try hard to
understand what you miss in my posts (not my work!). We are not yet
at the point of agreeing about what we are not agreeing upon.
To be clear my derivation does not involve an atom of speculation.
Perhaps you could tell me what is the object of my speculation, but
I'm afraid you are only confusing hypothetico-deductive reasoning and
speculation (in which case all theories are speculative: in that
large sense I agree.
Bruno
http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/
Received on Tue Aug 30 2005 - 06:04:24 PDT