Whoa. I missed the last part, where you actually judged FALSE. Sorry about that! 'was tired yesterday. =P
~ Roujo On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Jonathan Rouillard <jonathan.rouill...@gmail.com> wrote: > Uuhhh... > > Gratuitous arguments: > A. Any /person/ identified by the author as a co-author is a co-author. > B. MRW&A was identified by the author as a co-author. > C. Therefore, MRW&A is a person. > > IMO, that doesn't hold 'cause you're supposing that MRW&A is a person > to make A relevant, then say that since A is relevant MRW&A is a > person. That's circular logic right there. Heck, if this were true, I > could author anything, say that my table is co-author thus making it a > person and then making it join Agora. Surely, there's another way to > prove that MRW&A is a person, but I don't think these argument should > be precedent to anything. =P > > ~ Roujo > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 7:16 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Kerim Aydin wrote: >>> On Sun, 20 Mar 2011, Ed Murphy wrote: >>> > ============================== CFJ 2977 ============================== >>> > MRW and Associates is a second-class person. >> >> The argument for True seems to stem from R107 arguing as follows: >> A. Any person identified by the author as a co-author is a co-author. >> B. MRW&A was identified by the author as a co-author. >> C. Therefore, MRW&A is a person. >> Kudos for an excellect example the fallacy of the undistributed middle >> (All A are B; C is B; therefore C is A). FALSE. >> >> >> -G. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - >> >> >
