VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:19:48 04/20/03 Sun
Author: Kharn
Author Host/IP: kharnserv.xs4all.nl / 213.84.47.237
Subject: That's not the same
In reply to: «șTone Caponeș» 's message, "Re: Obviously, that's why I don't appreciate this style of circle-reasoning." on 18:29:39 04/17/03 Thu

>Hmm... Sort of like the whole idea that more guns
>means more crime?

Using "more guns means more shooting" as an argument against guns would be a bad circle-reasoning (as long as the premis shooting isn't automatically bad is valid), just as "more drugs means more drug-usage" isn't circle-reasoning as long as it isn't true by definition that drug abusing is bad.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.