Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OneWingedShark
{i.e. deception cannot work on the unreasoning [...]

I would differ with that premise.

75 posted on 12/15/2010 12:58:34 PM PST by Gondring (Paul Revere would have been flamed as a naysayer troll and told to go back to Boston.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies ]


To: Gondring

>>{i.e. deception cannot work on the unreasoning [...]
>
>I would differ with that premise.

Why is that?
The way I see it a boulder cannot reason, and so it cannot be deceived.
A computer which can process information, but not reason, cannot be deceived (though the information it is given might indeed be false).
A dog, which does have some little reasoning capability (the towel over the dog-biscuit test, for example, involves reasoning) might be deceived (such as throwing the non-existent stick for him to fetch).
Humans, which are commonly recognized as being creatures-of-reason (though whether or not they commonly EMPLOY reasoning is a different subject), are commonly deceived.


76 posted on 12/15/2010 2:36:32 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson