Re: Selecting Crowns -- Definitions

[kuijt@umiacs.UMD.EDU]

Alfredo defines a number of terms (all identified by using initial caps),
then defines some standard (according to him) arguments, and continues to
say:

>Now that we have clearly defined our terms, it becomes clear that is
>illogical to use the Argument of Might to support maintaining the Old
>Tradition, or to use the Argument of Sufficiency to counter the Argument
>of Fairness.  Also, it is clear that if one can assert the Argument of
>Might and the Argument of Suffiency, the correct course to pursue would
>be to maintain the Old Tradition, rather than, say, adopting a trivial
>Additional Challenge such as flipping a coin.
>
>OTOH, if one asserts the Argument of Deficiency, one should logically
>call for an Additional Challenge rather than an Alternate Selection
>(unless one were arguing that martial prowess was a deficiency (not a
>likely scenario!)) and the type of Additional Challenge proposed should
>be based on correcting the deficiency asserted about the Old Tradition.


Alfredo, I hope you will not take this the wrong way, but you have
not clarified things with your definitions.  The above is almost
incomprehensible BECAUSE of your definitions.  You have created jargon
that nobody will understand without a cue sheet, and reduced an issue
of significant intellectual interest (and strong emotional response)
into meaningless gibberish.

Which is quite a feat, as it turns out :^)

Not meaning to offend,

Dafydd ap Gwystl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe to the Kingdom of Atlantia mailing list, send a message
to majordomo@csc.ncsu.edu with no subject and the body consisting of:
unsubscribe atlantia