tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post115402436975616195..comments2024-03-28T12:34:14.649-07:00Comments on dangerous idea: Carrier compares himself to Aristotle, or does he?Victor Repperthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10962948073162156902noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1155340320949583812006-08-11T16:52:00.000-07:002006-08-11T16:52:00.000-07:00Based on Richard's clarification, Victor, I'd say ...Based on Richard's clarification, Victor, I'd say your original interpretation (which was also my original interpretation, based on my initial reading of Wood's article just now) was correct.<BR/><BR/>The fact that Wood thought otherwise and wrote that entire article without first asking Carrier what he meant doesn't say much for Wood.Lippardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1155340148377652242006-08-11T16:49:00.000-07:002006-08-11T16:49:00.000-07:00Carrier has clarified his remark here:Note of Corr...Carrier has clarified his remark <A HREF="http://www.columbia.edu/~rcc20/contrawood.html#a" REL="nofollow">here</A>:<BR/><BR/>Note of Correction: I previously used the phrase "no less a philosopher than" with respect Aristotle and Hume, which Wood then took out of context as a reference to my equivalence to them in fame or accomplishment, rather than what the context clearly established as my meaning, which is my equivalence to them in being a philosopher. Wood also ignored the word "relevant" and babbled on about such irrelevancies as my not knowing as much about octopus biology as Aristotle, which has nothing to do with philosophy or being a philosopher. I also changed the word "match" to "comparable" to prevent anyone thinking I ever meant my knowledge is identical to theirs. For those with the patience of Job, Wood's arduously long ramblings about this can be read in Richard Carrier: Equal to Aristotle?Lippardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16826768452963498005noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1154210573127586892006-07-29T15:02:00.000-07:002006-07-29T15:02:00.000-07:00I am not at all impressed by Carrier's philosophy....I am not at all impressed by Carrier's philosophy.O'Brienhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07532848760781346921noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10584495.post-1154040327803026992006-07-27T15:45:00.000-07:002006-07-27T15:45:00.000-07:00What a waste of time writing that article was!Basi...What a waste of time writing that article was!<BR/><BR/>Basically, he wants to justify an ad hominem against Carrier (against something Carrier said in response to another ad hominem from someone else). <BR/><BR/>Seems sort of foolish.<BR/><BR/>But entertaining to the lurkers.Blue Devil Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12045468316613818510noreply@blogger.com