Till's "logic"
. Richard Jones dick_jones@usa.net
Mon, 13 Apr 1998 23:00:54 (00892530054, ww05-cDmXa32525@netaddress.usa.net)
Till erronenously stated:
<<< For pity's sake, Ganesh, there is nothing at all
"good" about Dave's logic. It is a classic example of
the fallacy of equivocation. When he tells his wife
that he will never "leave" her, he is using the word
leave in the sense of "abandon" or "desert," or in
other words to leave her in the sense of departing
from their marital relationship. However, when he "leaves"
her to go to work, he is not abandoning or deserting her.
He is "leaving" her only in the sense of bringing about
a temporary absence or separation... >>>
No, Till, yours is a classic example of the fallacy of
quoting out of context, which was the whole point of
the discussion which you seem to have missed. The point
was that the words do NOT have the same meaning in both
places. But then you are unable to either recognize or
use good logic.
Many of the alleged errors found by Biblical errantist
nuts are of this fallacy. The context is all important.
Dick Jones
____________________________________________________________________
Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com