Re: [OT] (was): Robust Algorithms

From: David Longley (David_at_longley.demon.co.uk)
Date: 12/16/04

  • Next message: W.J. van Hoeve: "CFP: CP-AI-OR 2005: Second call for papers" 
    Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:21:32 +0000

    In article <41c14720.59338130@news.east.earthlink.net>, David James
    Polewka <joseywales@outlaw.nospam> writes
    >"=?iso-8859-1?q?J=F3n?= Fairbairn" <jon.fairbairn@cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
    >
    >>Ralph Hartley <hartley@aic.nrl.navy.mil> writes:
    >>
    >>> David James Polewka wrote:
    >>>
    >>> > That's right! The number of people who believe something
    >>> > has nothing to do with whether it is true or false! Never has,
    >>> > and never will!
    >>>
    >>> Many people disagree with that!
    >>
    >>Actually, there's an instance where it does: money. If
    >>enough people believe that the dollar is worth less, it's
    >>worth less. ;-)
    >
    >Any more? How about an exhaustive listing!?!
    >
    >
    >=========================
    > "Endeavor to persevere"
    >=========================

    Even in the above case, it isn't what people *believe* that determines
    the "value" of the dollar, it's what's *done* with "it". The fact that
    these behaviours (e.g trading) need not even be done by *people* shows
    that a) it has nothing to do with "belief" and b) that it doesn't matter
    how *many* agents are involved. It comes down to subtleties to do with
    the *rates* of behaviours and their controlling contingencies.

    "Mentalistic" economics provides no more support than the original
    "mentalistic" psychology which began this exchange. It's just another
    egregious example of the same problem - "mentalism" and intensional
    opacity. 

    -- 
David Longley
http://www.longley.demon.co.uk/Frag.htm
  • Next message: W.J. van Hoeve: "CFP: CP-AI-OR 2005: Second call for papers"