Dayan Jayatilleka’s Arguments For Supporting Mahinda: False Premises And Faulty Logic
By Niranjan Rambukwella -January 4, 2015
This article is not about Dayan Jayatilleka – it’s about the arguments he uses to defend the Rajapaksa regime. These arguments are currently the most sophisticated apologies that exist for the Rajapaksa regime. If they are flawed, then the entire foundation underlying the case for supporting Mahinda Rajapaksa crumbles.
Arguments can be flawed for two distinct reasons. First, if an argument’s premises are false. The second cause of flawed arguments is invalid logic linking premises to conclusions. For example, the conclusion in the argument below:
Premise I: Socrates is a man
Premise II: All men are mortals
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
holds because the premises are true and the logic linking the premises to the conclusion is valid. If either of them were faulty then the conclusion would not hold.
Dayan’s has two inter-linked arguments for supporting Mahinda Rajapaksa. The first argument is to arrive at to the conclusion that voting forMaithripala Sirisena will result in a Ranil or Chandrika government. The second argument, that we should vote for Mahinda Rajapaksa because his track record is better that Ranil/Chandrika, depends on the first. But the first argument is flawed because its logic is faulty. The second fails because its premises are false and also because of faulty logic.
Faulty Logic – A Vote for Maithripala is a Vote for Ranil/CBK Read More
Imprecise And Inaccurate Generalizations About The ICES Episode
By Rajiva Wijesinha -January 4, 2015
Prof. Rajiva Wijesinha MP
Having addressed a meeting of professionals in Kandy, I was taken back to the past on returning to Colombo and reading the last episode of Doc (the Seventh Dwarf in my series on Enemies of the President’s Promise) in the Colombo Telegraph. The comments relate mainly to my description of the Rama Mani episode, when we found that the International Centre for Ethnic Studies was being perverted from the purpose for which it had been initially set up. I did not want to respond in the Comments section of the Telegraph, since the arguments there tend to go round in circles, but since two people I know have used their own names, I feel I owe them the courtesy of a reply. I will accordingly post this on my Facebook Page, and send it to Colombo Telegraph for publication on its own.
I will not here go into the old ICES story again, but four of the comments were most interesting. One was from R Varathan, who I think was the Finance Director at the time, who had been responsible according to Radhika for the financial mess ICES was in. If it is he, I am sorry that he does not mention his own involvement in the matter. His comment is confined to suggesting that Rama Mani was treated badly, but he does not attempt to defend her conduct.
Then there is someone who calls himself Moda Putha, who was asked by Rama Mani to deliver a birthday present to Bradman Weerakoon on his 90th birthday. This would suggest he was a friend of Rama Mani, but again he does not disclose his interest.Read More
