Open source radicals--eat cake

TalkBack 28 of 99:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Fallacy of Four Terms

A: Richard wants to bake a cake and eat it too.
B: John wants to eat a cake but not bake it.
C: Therefore some who want to eat cake do not want to bake it. That is to say:

Some "S"(cake eaters) are not "P"(cake bakers)
However all "S" are "S". Duh! Right?

I quote a strange argument:
<<<<<> is to ensure that the needs of users
> are elevated to equivalent to the rights
> of developers in the software social
> contract.:
following:

"the entire goal of the Free Boat movement is to ensure the needs of average citizens are elevated in the social contract to the equivalent of the rights of people who live on the coast" >>>>

Just a second! Lets break that down.

A: There are a bunch of people living on the coast who want to ride on boats.
B: The people living on the coast are asking the government to buy them boats.
C: Therefore the the people living in on the coast want the government to buy boats for the people living in Iowa.

We could have concluded:

C1: Some who want to ride on boats want the government to buy them boats.

We cannot conclude that:
C2: Some who do not ride on boats want the government to buy them boats.

In the cake example, all of the people in question eat cake.
In the case of the open-source software movement, all of the people in question are those who use software or benefit from it.
In the case of the boats, an additional group was slipped into the argument who are not party to the discussion.

Nobody is asking the Government to purchase software for the people living on the coast or in Iowa. But people are asking the government to enforce copyrights. Microsoft, out on the Upper-Left Coast, is making an argument much more like your strange example. Microsoft is demanding that the government charge taxpayers, some of whom who neither own nor use computers, to pay to investigate and lock up people who want to use their software without paying royalties. People who don't want to eat cake, who don't want to bake cake, who don't want to buy cake and who don't want to sell cake are not involved in the "cake baking social contract". So why did you bring them in?

An easier way to follow the arguments of Microsoft supporters is to follow the advice of Kierkegaard who says that, to get ahead as a scholar, "Spare no ink praising the king". The arguments they make are called "ad hoc" arguments and are not usually as transparent as those of John Carrol who brought in an example of a party not even in the debate as either a user or a developer.



Daniel Hoffman

Posted by: rp518dan   Posted on: 03/02/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Infrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Three Steps You Need to Know to Stop Data Loss Varonis Sensitive data exposed to misuse or loss... it is the stuff of nightmares ... Download Now