But some paradoxes are semantically flawed (Sorensen 2003b, 352) and some have answers that are backed by a pseudo-argument employing a defective "lemma" that lacks a truth-value.
One pseudo-argument for the invasion invoked World War II: We don't want another Munich (where Hitler and British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain reached an agreement to allow Nazi Germany's annexation of Czechoslovakia).
Pseudo-arguments such as "There is nothing else" or "Do you know how much they pay for medication that does not work?" are not valid and scientific arguments.
How else to characterise their resorting to a pseudo-scientific argument that adult stem cells (found in several organs of our bodies) hold out the same - or even more - promise for cures as do stem cells derived from embryos?
And that pseudo-scientific argument — that an embryo is a person because it contains the DNA of a potential person — is true of any human cell, and certainly true of the countless fertilized eggs that, in the natural course of reproduction, are destroyed before they can develop.
If Pseudo-Scotus' argument is invalid, it is possible for the premise to be true and conclusion false.
If Pseudo-Scotus' argument is valid then, since its premise is true, its conclusion is true – which means it is invalid.
Otherwise, they couldn't resist pseudo gravitas.
How? Mike [Adopts pseudo deep voice] Whhhyyyy?
Sorry, Joel, far from being any kind of intellectual, pseudo- or otherwise, I certainly wasn't trying to impress anyone by citing your pro-Constellation position, nor was I trying to interpret your work: I was simply refuting "arguments" that still don't seem to make much sense to me -- but, then again, it's just me, Bubba, a simple, provincial country boy.
"I'm sorry," I pseudo sobbed.
