Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!cbmvax!snark!eric From: eric@snark.UUCP (Eric S. Raymond) Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech Subject: Re: The Nature of Knowledge Message-ID: <113@snark.UUCP> Date: Mon, 6-Jul-87 00:06:10 EDT Article-I.D.: snark.113 Posted: Mon Jul 6 00:06:10 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 7-Jul-87 03:36:33 EDT References: <3587e521.44e6@apollo.uucp> <680@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU> <103@snark.UUCP> <108@snark.UUCP> Organization: Thyrsus Enterprises, Malvern PA 19355 Lines: 28 Summary: Mr. MichaelPSmith, I apologize... I'd have used email for this reply (as you should have for your flame), but a public attack like that demands a public rejoinder. In article <9871@duke.cs.duke.edu>, mps@duke.cs.duke.edu (Michael P. Smith) writes: > Imagine a discussion on computer science with the summary line "I know > what I'm talking about" and the reason given was that "I minored in > computer science." I'm sorry you interpreted it that way. "I know what I'm talking about." was a response to some snottiness in an earlier posting by Gene Ward Smith in which he imputed that I was using the terminology incorrectly. I had no intention of claiming special access to Final Answers -- and "if I have seen far, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants" -- Democritus, Willam of Ockham, C. S. Peirce, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Alfred Korzybski (to name but a few). And, BTW, I subsequently got email from 3 netters and (just this morning) a transcontinental phone call from a fourth congratulating me on "saying things that needed to be said" in this debate. I guess 'sophomoric tone' is in the eye of the beholder. Now: do you have anything constructive to contribute to the discussion? -- Eric S. Raymond UUCP: {{seismo,ihnp4,rutgers}!cbmvax,sdcrdcf!burdvax}!snark!eric Post: 22 South Warren Avenue, Malvern, PA 19355 Phone: (215)-296-5718