RE: virus: Re:MS Flip Software Price
Robin Faichney (r.j.faichney@stir.ac.uk)
Tue, 14 Oct 1997 10:17:58 +0100
> From: David McFadzean[SMTP:david@lucifer.com]
>
> At 01:19 PM 10/13/97 -0700, Richard Brodie wrote:
> >You've kind of twisted the question around. No one disputed that
> logic CAN
> >BE applied to human relationships. But it neither underlies them nor
> >effectively nurtures them.
>
> It depends what you mean by "logic", doesn't it? I would contend that
> parationality (as-if logic) does indeed underlie and effectively
> nurture
> human relationships. In fact our emotions, instincts, customs, habits,
> etc. can best be understood in that light. Do you still disagree?
>
Two questions: can we understand "parational" as simply
"apparently logical"? And, what's the difference (if any)
between things that survive by being parational, and those
that survive because their doing so does not conflict
with any law of nature? (The implication of the second
question being, of course, that parationality, if it reduces
to "in accordance with the laws of nature", doesn't add
anything to our understanding.)
Robin