3 ms·
I dunno. Sounds like there's a chance that the economist's own biases are coming into play here. I'd apply the Principle of Indifference...."No, because" and "Y
by jasonwocky 13y ago
I dunno. Sounds like there's a chance that the economist's own biases are coming into play here. I'd apply the Principle of Indifference...."No, because" and "Yes, if" pretty much sound like the same thing to me. It's how you react to those phrases that makes all the difference.
If you let "Yes, if" evoke a different emotional response than, "No, because", even though they provide more or less the same information content, what does that say about you?
- vbuterin 13y agoActually, it's "no, unless" and "yes, if" that are synonyms. "No, because" carries the implication that the listed justifications are irresolvable.
- jasonwocky 13y agoI won't argue that "No, because" and "Yes, if" are mathematically equivalent statements. But I hold that the immutability implication you mention is something added by the listener, not information "carried" by the bits of the "No, because." They may not be proper synonyms, but a listener that's forgiving of input errors can interpret them as synonyms, at least until proven otherwise through further conversation.