why throwing around words like "anti-semitism" is fascism

[prozak at anus.com]

> > No, it's expressed in a language; algorithms can be coded in many
> > languages.
> > 
> So it does depend on language. Your Œlogic¹ does not operate without
> language. Or: it is a language.

Algorithms and logic are not necessarily a language, but are commonly 
expressed through one. However, there are ways it can be expressed 
through other means, including data structures which don't fit our 
sentential definition of language.

> >> > Sure. Just like Bush.
> > 
> > Exactly. He's claiming that because the West is more "Democratic"
> > than Iraq, we have the right to own nuclear weapons, and they don't.
> > 
> Your logic here does not appear very logical. Here, one should think that
> Iraq would have just as much right as anybody else.

I didn't say his logic was not contradictory; however, he is claiming 
superiority for his Democratic principles and is claiming that those 
same principles justify the war on Iraq.

Good = Democracy, evil = everything else.

> > I'm not attributing linguistic confusion to either party; I'm saying
> > that the subtopic has been framed in confusion.
> > 
> It seems that you do claim to be able to operate with a Œtruth concept¹ that
> is not dependent on criteria established in language.
...
> >>> > > first, to assert that objective
> >>> > > truth doesn't exist is to be fooled by language; language assesses
> >>> > > truth, but descriptions are also true in the sense that they to the
> >>> > > degree possible accurately portray eventiture in external reality.
> 
> Right, and how do you know about Œeveniture in external reality¹? How do you
> compare Œeveniture in external reality¹ to assessments in language, if not
> by means of language?

By means of literal comparison with data. You are probably better off 
doing basic research into ontology before asking these :) unless 
you're just trying to "make a point."

> > Philosophical logic - the term "formal logic" is often used to refer
> > to logical systems which function only within, to my mind, their own
> > narrow scope of definition.
> > 
> Does your Œphilosophical logic¹ exist independent of language? 

Yes.

Are you dependent on language as your only logical faculty?


-- 
Backup Rider of the Apocalypse
www.anus.com/metal/
DEATH AND BLACK METAL