Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6309967" data-attributes="member: 2525">I'm afraid I agree with the folks you're butting heads against here.&nbsp; The author did make a value judgement.&nbsp; Are we now claiming that efficacy (the ability to produce the intended result; usefulness) carries no value judgement with it?Huh, so you are in fact claiming that efficacy carries no value judgement.&nbsp; OK, I find that weird.&nbsp; How is it not a value judgement? A value judgement (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_judgment" target="_blank">according to Wikipedia</a>) includes the usefulness of something, based on a comparison.The author is literally saying &quot;The fighter's ability to achieve the stated goal of being effective at fighting (&quot;combat efficacy&quot;) is not as well met as it was in all prior editions&quot;.&nbsp; That's what that sentence means in English, when you define the words used in the sentence.&nbsp;&nbsp; That's a judgement of the value of the thing.&nbsp; If you compare the efficacy (another way to say usefulness, and in fact usefulness is listed as a synonym of efficacy) of A, B, C, and D, and you say A, B, and C all have a higher efficacy than D, then that's a value judgement.&nbsp; That's a comparison of the usefulness of something, which is what &quot;value judgement&quot; <a href="https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&amp;rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS515US515&amp;ion=1&amp;espv=2&amp;es_th=1&amp;ie=UTF-8#q=efficacy" target="_blank">means</a>.So yeah, I don't think you have to try very hard at all to see a value judgement in the sentence.&nbsp; In fact I am having a hard time seeing your view that there is no value judgement there.&nbsp; If it's not a value judgement, then what do you think it is?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6309967, member: 2525"] I'm afraid I agree with the folks you're butting heads against here. The author did make a value judgement. Are we now claiming that efficacy (the ability to produce the intended result; usefulness) carries no value judgement with it? Huh, so you are in fact claiming that efficacy carries no value judgement. OK, I find that weird. How is it not a value judgement? A value judgement ([URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_judgment"]according to Wikipedia[/URL]) includes the usefulness of something, based on a comparison. The author is literally saying "The fighter's ability to achieve the stated goal of being effective at fighting ("combat efficacy") is not as well met as it was in all prior editions". That's what that sentence means in English, when you define the words used in the sentence. That's a judgement of the value of the thing. If you compare the efficacy (another way to say usefulness, and in fact usefulness is listed as a synonym of efficacy) of A, B, C, and D, and you say A, B, and C all have a higher efficacy than D, then that's a value judgement. That's a comparison of the usefulness of something, which is what "value judgement" [URL="https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS515US515&ion=1&espv=2&es_th=1&ie=UTF-8#q=efficacy"]means[/URL]. So yeah, I don't think you have to try very hard at all to see a value judgement in the sentence. In fact I am having a hard time seeing your view that there is no value judgement there. If it's not a value judgement, then what do you think it is? [/QUOTE]

Verification