Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
comp.lang.lisp
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Scheme as a virtual machine?
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Raffael Cavallaro  
View profile  
 More options Nov 23 2010, 10:34 am
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp, comp.lang.haskell, comp.lang.functional, comp.lang.python, comp.lang.scheme
From: Raffael Cavallaro <raffaelcavall...@pas.despam.s.il.vous.plait.mac.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 10:34:22 -0500
Local: Tues, Nov 23 2010 10:34 am
Subject: Re: Scheme as a virtual machine?
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On 2010-11-23 10:08:12 -0500, Keith H Duggar said:

> There is a well-known name for such illogical reasoning: ad hominem.

You don't understand ad hominem:

"The ad hominem is a classic logical fallacy,[2] but it is not always
fallacious. For in some instances, questions of personal conduct,
character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue.[3]"

Source: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>

Sometimes the person's conduct and motives *are relevant* to the point
under discussion. Financial conflict of interest is a perfect example
where it *is* legitimate and relevant to explore a person's motives and
conduct outside of the debate.

In this case, JH's conduct outside of the debate (i.e., the fact that
he earns his living by selling tools and training for a particular set
of languages) and his motives (i.e., he is therefore financially
motivated to present these languages in the best possible light and to
trash-talk other languages), render his arguments in the debate
inherently suspect.

warmest regards,

Ralph

--
Raffael Cavallaro


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google