Method and Logic
in [Cryptography]
|
From: WTShaw on 30 Jan 2010 05:00 If you are convinced that argument exclusive of data is worth much, start with downloading and studying this classic: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/27942
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 30 Jan 2010 07:06 WTShaw wrote: > If you are convinced that argument exclusive of data is worth much, > start with downloading and studying this classic: > > http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/27942 It seems that the Gutenberg project has indeed made quite a lot of valuable old books available to the general public. This one has 1156 pages! Could you kindly give a book review of some sort for facilitating decision to eventually read it in detail? Browsing the preface, I found the following very well said: Even the criticisms from which I most dissent have been of great service to me, by showing in what places the exposition most needed to be improved, or the argument strengthened. And I should have been well pleased if the book had undergone a much greater amount of attack; as in that case I should probably have been enabled to improve it still more than I believe I have now done. Of course, the author refers herewith to concrete objective criticisms and not to spams that came into being only since the ara of electronic communications and that serve no purpose but wasting the bandwidth of the internet. Thanks, M. K. Shen
From: unruh on 30 Jan 2010 12:50 Amazing. Two posts and noone has the least interest in telling us what in the world this document actually is. I detest that kind of post. Be polite enough to tell the reader what you suggesting he look at. A System Of Logic, Ratiocinative And Inductive by John Stuart Mill On 2010-01-30, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)t-online.de> wrote: > WTShaw wrote: >> If you are convinced that argument exclusive of data is worth much, >> start with downloading and studying this classic: >> >> http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/27942 > > It seems that the Gutenberg project has indeed made quite a lot of > valuable old books available to the general public. This one has > 1156 pages! Could you kindly give a book review of some sort > for facilitating decision to eventually read it in detail? > > Browsing the preface, I found the following very well said: > > Even the criticisms from which I most dissent have been of > great service to me, by showing in what places the exposition > most needed to be improved, or the argument strengthened. And > I should have been well pleased if the book had undergone a > much greater amount of attack; as in that case I should probably > have been enabled to improve it still more than I believe I have > now done. > > Of course, the author refers herewith to concrete objective criticisms > and not to spams that came into being only since the ara of electronic > communications and that serve no purpose but wasting the bandwidth of > the internet. > > Thanks, > > M. K. Shen
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 30 Jan 2010 15:19 unruh wrote: > Amazing. Two posts and noone has the least interest in telling us what > in the world this document actually is. > I detest that kind of post. Be polite enough to tell the reader what you > suggesting he look at. I understood that WTSHAW subsumed the stuff in the title of the thread, namely "Method and Logic", so "something" about the book was at least said by him. Since however this is too succint in my view, I asked him whether he could give us a (more or less long) book review. I have up till now only quickly glanced at the preface and couldn't decide, for reasons of time resources, to read the proper content of the book before knowing something more of what the book actually deals with. M. K. Shen
From: unruh on 30 Jan 2010 17:46
On 2010-01-30, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)t-online.de> wrote: > unruh wrote: >> Amazing. Two posts and noone has the least interest in telling us what >> in the world this document actually is. >> I detest that kind of post. Be polite enough to tell the reader what you >> suggesting he look at. > > I understood that WTSHAW subsumed the stuff in the title of the thread, > namely "Method and Logic", so "something" about the book was at least > said by him. Since however this is too succint in my view, I asked him > whether he could give us a (more or less long) book review. I have up > till now only quickly glanced at the preface and couldn't decide, for > reasons of time resources, to read the proper content of the book > before knowing something more of what the book actually deals with. > But you felt that it was important to remove my qoute of the title of the book. (By John Stuart Mill, and it is on logic) |