[extropy-chat] survey on fringe ideas: politics
dirk.bruere at gmail.com
Sat Oct 29 12:36:26 UTC 2005
On 10/29/05, spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of "Hal Finney"
> > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 11:27 AM
> > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] survey on fringe ideas: politics
> > There is one thing I find interesting about this story, relating to
> > these questions from Spike:
> > > OK now. Do you think that
> > >
> > > 1. Rove leaked the CIA agent's identity to get revenge
> > > 2. Libby leaked the CIA agent's identity to get revenge
> > > 3. Cheney leaked the CIA agent's identity to get revenge
> > The interesting point to me is that again and again in reports on this
> > issue, the motivation described is not, as Spike has it, for
> Hal makes many interesting observations. My interest in
> this particular story is to demonstrate a means of establishing
> a correlation between knowledge of a particular event or
> concept with a particular end of the belief spectrum.
> This whole argument seems philosophically flawed in that there is no "100%
knowledge" - only degress of belief.
Let's assume that Rove 'really' leaked the info.
How would anyone except Rove know for sure?
Orders and instructions can be misinterpreted, go awry etc
Even if you were in the same room when he made the phonecall, you would not
know for sure who he was talking to. Even he could not have known 'for sure'
who he was talking to without a face to face meeting.
There is no certainty, and without certainty there is only belief.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat