You are correct that I have not defended it as of yet utilizing
  the context with which you are comfortable. I may be able to and
  I may try, or I am not able to and I may not try.

  I see this as a translation problem more than a logic problem
  and the problem is mine for being unable to use your
  methodology, not yours for being true to it.
  Ok. I believe I see the crux of the matter.

  You wish me to stay within the parameters of the game. When I go
  outside of the parameters of the game, it makes my moves
  invalid.

  Would this be a correct analogy or am I oversimplifying? It is
  quite possible that we are each attempting to force the other to
  play our own games by our own rules.

  You may be attempting to have me (and/or Millard) play the game
  of logic within the parameters of the system you are using.

  I don't know about Millard, but for myself, I may be attempting
  to have you play the game of logic from within the parameters of
  the system that I am using, which is that of a sociohistorical
  context within which I see the parameters of the system you are
  using.

  But it may also be valid that you can equally place my game of
  logic within the parameters of the system that you are using.

  I believe the main difference is inclusion vs exclusion. I am
  not excluding your system but including it in mine.

  I do not think that there is room in your system for mine to fit
  within but I could be mistaken here and welcome correction. I do
  not wish to imply superiority by any means, just differences.

You are viewing proxied material from sdf.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.