You are conflating a duration of time invested acquiring a particular skill, which is quantitative, and therefore may be ranked, if desired, with a skill itself.
Well, I do agree that the surgeon isn’t necessarily a better person because he has spend more time studying, but the greater time investment in training a surgeon is something that needs to be taken into consideration. How do you think should it be considered?
Again, skills are different, not greater or lesser.
That’s what’s called an axiom, because it’s a statement that can’t really be argued. To disprove it, a valuation of skills would need to be imposed, and any valuation could just as easily be rejected, or turn out to be useless. And I do agree with your axiom.
So, my question is, what conclusions do you derive from the axiom?
Any valuation that is imposed is simply one imposed, not natural, and neither is any value derived from it essential as an attribute of that which is being appraised.
You are conflating a duration of time invested acquiring a particular skill, which is quantitative, and therefore may be ranked, if desired, with a skill itself.
What is your thesis?
Skills differ qualitatively, but not by expressing any natural ranking as greater or lesser one against another.
Well, I do agree that the surgeon isn’t necessarily a better person because he has spend more time studying, but the greater time investment in training a surgeon is something that needs to be taken into consideration. How do you think should it be considered?
Now you are shifting the goalposts. I am not asserting that no one would take note of how someone may acquire one skill compared to another.
Again, skills are different, not greater or lesser.
That’s what’s called an axiom, because it’s a statement that can’t really be argued. To disprove it, a valuation of skills would need to be imposed, and any valuation could just as easily be rejected, or turn out to be useless. And I do agree with your axiom.
So, my question is, what conclusions do you derive from the axiom?
Any valuation that is imposed is simply one imposed, not natural, and neither is any value derived from it essential as an attribute of that which is being appraised.
Okay, what other conclusions do you derive from the axiom?
There is no axiom, only a negation of an assertion.