The discussion about higher order beliefs is probably a great deal of what drove our evolution towards larger but highly-energy-intensive brains; compare:
Take the statement: "Harry said to me, he said, 'I never told anybody that Al's wife was a retired strip-teaser.' Mind you, I don't pretend to believe Harry, but that's what he said, all right." What are the possible true sources for the statement of fact or libel concerning Al's unnamed wife? What are the alternatives on ostensible sources? First use? Second use? The common sense needed to analyze this statement is of the same order as the process involved in analyzing the statement: "Reliable sources in Paris state that the visit of the American labor delegation has produced sensational repercussions in Moscow, and that Moscow, upon the basis of the American attitude, is determined to press for unification of the entire German labor movement."
and specifically with regard to Elaine's "friend" (in the context of "someday...we're going to get enough people in the Supreme Court to change that law."):
First point to note is the character of the source. There are several choices on this: the true source (who really got it out?) and the ostensible source (whose name is signed to it?); also, the first-use source (who used it the first time?) and the second-use source (who claims merely to be using it as a quotation?).
EDIT: now UQ is in Australia, but on the one hand, while behavioural economists do cite sources and occasionally run (natural) experiments, therefore counting as scientists, on the other hand...
1 comment
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 9.5 ms ] threadhttps://www.gutenberg.org/files/48612/48612-h/48612-h.htm#Pa...
Take the statement: "Harry said to me, he said, 'I never told anybody that Al's wife was a retired strip-teaser.' Mind you, I don't pretend to believe Harry, but that's what he said, all right." What are the possible true sources for the statement of fact or libel concerning Al's unnamed wife? What are the alternatives on ostensible sources? First use? Second use? The common sense needed to analyze this statement is of the same order as the process involved in analyzing the statement: "Reliable sources in Paris state that the visit of the American labor delegation has produced sensational repercussions in Moscow, and that Moscow, upon the basis of the American attitude, is determined to press for unification of the entire German labor movement."
and specifically with regard to Elaine's "friend" (in the context of "someday...we're going to get enough people in the Supreme Court to change that law."):
First point to note is the character of the source. There are several choices on this: the true source (who really got it out?) and the ostensible source (whose name is signed to it?); also, the first-use source (who used it the first time?) and the second-use source (who claims merely to be using it as a quotation?).
EDIT: now UQ is in Australia, but on the one hand, while behavioural economists do cite sources and occasionally run (natural) experiments, therefore counting as scientists, on the other hand...