From: Geraint Rees (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 03 2002 - 05:25:29 MST
On 1/3/02 11:12 AM, "Joe Dees" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> understanding). I submit that we understand the fifteen all too well, by both
> their actions and their words.
In the context of this artificially constructed situation, sure.
> Those who do not wish to participate in option 1 are by default adopting
> another option; most will probably adopt option 3. Since the 15 represent all
> Muslims (1 billion out of six), presumably most of them will adopt it also,
> regardless of their sympathies. They, of course, would not be either hunters
> or hunted.
Now you're moving out of the artificial situation and linking it with the
real world. Here the bias is clear; the 15 inhabitants of the artifical
world who have taken a vow to destroy the other 85 are identified as 'all
Muslims'. This is clearly (in the real world) incorrect.
> You need to precisely specify the nature of the bias, rather than simply
> proclaiming it in boo-hooray fashion.
Sure. You have constructed an artificial situation with a limited
distribution of individuals with highly artificial opinions and behaviours
to illustrate your personal opinion. Nothing wrong with that. The bias lies
in your limited selection though, because when you link it to the real world
(as you have just done), it fails to capture the full spectrum of actual
real-world behaviours, and so may lead to erroneous conclusions.
For example, you have stated that the 15 (who in the artificial world have
'sworn fealty to a murderous Thugee ideology, and the only people they will
not kill are their own') in the real world 'represent all Muslims'. This is
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:32 MST