tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post1607189918306756426..comments2023-10-08T15:51:17.426+00:00Comments on Beyond Necessity: A neutral point of view?Edward Ockhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-32668564477072735202011-09-27T22:31:24.485+00:002011-09-27T22:31:24.485+00:00«Some men are free" and "Some men are no...«Some men are free" and "Some men are not free" are contrary to another <br />They are subcontraries, not contraries.» <br />Thank you for your correction, which is entirely correct, of course (what I had in mind was 'opposed' but then I run inadvertently after your own expression). <br />(As for the possibility of presenting two (or more) opposing perspectives in a neutral point of view, it sems I can stand my ground.)Phronesishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01309245668249740545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-81739372758348567302011-09-27T18:25:28.695+00:002011-09-27T18:25:28.695+00:00>>Some men are free" and "Some men...>>Some men are free" and "Some men are not free" are contrary to another <br /><br />They are subcontraries, not contraries.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-47808720854870382842011-09-27T18:16:56.435+00:002011-09-27T18:16:56.435+00:00«If one view that p is contrary to another q (mean...«If one view that p is contrary to another q (meaning that p and q cannot both be true), then it is very easy to determine which view the author holds (...)»<br />Not exactly. "Some men are free" and "Some men are not free" are contrary to another and they both can be true (altough they can't be both false).<br /><br />«Thus (...) Sanger's criterion that it should be difficult or impossible for the reader to determine what view the author holds is impossible to apply.» <br />Take the book 'Four Systems': what the author Carl Cohen attempts is to present each of the four political systems of the title (socialist democracy, individualist democracy, fascism and communism) as persuasively as the others - precisely in a neutral point of view. Now, take fascism and individualist democracy , for instance: they may be said to be opposite views and yet they can be presented in a sort of neutral point of view.<br />Or, if we are to be exposed to arguments on the issue of the permissibility of abortion, on what grounds should the article's author decide which one is true?<br />(This is far from suggesting that there is no truth or any such post-modernist claim.)<br />Paulo LopesPhronesishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01309245668249740545noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-80449824117186827562011-09-24T18:16:00.269+00:002011-09-24T18:16:00.269+00:00S7 was always a bit of a pain - I remember from my...S7 was always a bit of a pain - I remember from my days as an admin. Its a shame she won't be banned until next year.William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com