Date:         Sat, 3 Jan 1998 22:57:23 EST
From: want to paint fences? <mbarker@MIT.EDU>
Subject:      Re: [WRITERS] f: Hogwash?

On Sat, 03 Jan 1998 21:01:15 CST, Dan Goodman <dsgood@VISI.COM> wrote:
:)
:) Antaeus Feldspar says that whether libertarianism is hogwash is a
:) matter of opinion.
:)
:) Not if there's genuine political science.  If it's possible to
:) objectively measure how well a political theory fits social reality --
:) how well it predicts, how well it achieves the results it's intended
:) to achieve -- then it's possible to objectively measure the worth of
:) libertarianism.

Just as a possible clarification, try this recasting...

Joe says that whether the claim that the Earth is flat is hogwash is a
matter of opinion.

To which Phil annotates:

Not if there is such a thing as genuine science.  If it's possible to
objectively measure how well a theory about the shape of the earth
fits eality -- how well it predicts, how well it achieves the results
it's intended to achieve -- then it's possible to objectively measure
the worth of the claim that the Earth is flat.

And the little grammarian notes that the first statement is ambiguous.

Joe says that whether the zzzz is hogwash is a matter of opinion.

could be

Joe says that whether the zzzz is hogwash is ONLY a matter of opinion.
(i.e., it can be nothing else, such as objectively measurable)

or
Joe says that whether the zzz is hogwash is a matter of opinion, as
well was other qualities.  (it may be objectively measurable, but in
this case the assertion is a matter of opinion.)

Incidentally, the assertion that a statement or claim is "hogwash" is
a rather interesting format for argument, isn't it?  Using a
metaphorical comparison to something that most of us have never seen
in a way which implies a number of qualities about the statement or
claim, as well as anyone who happens to be associated with it...

Joe says that whether the zzz is incorrect is a matter of opinion.

Lacks some of that edge, doesn't it?

tink