Rule 1. Back your argument up
Rule 2. Respect other people’s work
Rule 3. Know thyself
Rule 4. Be open to other ideas
Rule 5. Stick to the point
Rule 6. Discuss
If the topic you want to address is under discussion below, please double click in the discussion thread, instead of using the Comment box.
New topic:
2010-04-20 16:59:23 So far so good?
Comments welcome! —Lizz
2010-04-20 17:07:54 I like your style.
Does this picture help? —PerigGouanvic
2010-04-20 17:11:47 YES! thanks —Lizz
2010-04-21 12:05:51 Thanks Lizz, this is a good line to folow up! —docmartin
2010-04-23 18:46:28 But where did these letters come from? Footnote source perhaps needed? —NormanNitram
Agreed: here's the footnote text: "These letters were made public by Pr. Josephson, the Nobel laureate, on his Cambridge University Website. Link: ![[WWW]](http://wikispot.org/wiki/eggheadbeta/img/sycamore-www.png){kind=small}
http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10/articles/uninvite.html"
2010-04-24 04:45:14 Francis Bacon studied shapes? —JohannesKepler
2010-04-24 05:35:42 if you don't mind, i pasted an excerpt from another PI page to here, where it clearly belongs, doesn't it? —Lizz
2010-04-24 06:17:25 Hi there,
I think that those letters to Josephson and Peat should be forwarded to Scientific American, the journal. —HumblePride
2010-04-24 06:31:40 What this Sir Maddox is basically saying is: "This is bad science, I do not need to study the methodology it is only bad science". Your Feyerabend seems to be painfully right. —HumblePride
2010-04-24 06:35:07 Yes, true, Maddox as well is "against method" for the worst reasons! —JohannesKepler
2010-04-24 06:38:54 I'm getting confused. Are you saying that Feyerabend and Maddox agree that method is not important, although they are opposed concerning so-called "magic"? Why do you philosophers always have to make things so complicated?? —Lizz
2010-04-24 06:48:55 Higher education makes you learn your teacher's prejudices. Maddox and Feyerabend had different teachers.
