(Untitled)

Nov 24, 2005 23:55

they were here first, but they didn't have guns

Leave a comment

essius November 26 2005, 03:13:07 UTC
Okay, I'll admit to an improper or at least unorthodox and thereby communicationally ineffective use of 'monism' and 'weapons of mass destruction.' But so is your use of the word 'fuckgrumplestump.'

Re: the uncritical acceptance of certain archeological facts, I only said that this type of acceptance is analogous to faith, not identical.

I did not say we didn't have the "Two Dogmas" discussion; I just lack the recollectivity necessary to bring it to mind.

To what words is chair related by which it gets its meaning? What is this "meaning-getting" relationship, anyway? Could you be more precise?

The severally necessary and jointly sufficient conditions for a chair are: (1) its being a piece of furniture and (2) its consisting of (a) a seat, (b) legs, and (c) back, as well as, optionally (but not necessarily) (d) arms. But where did you read me saying that it's "easy" to give these conditions for "any" word?

Anyway, I'm not as ignorant of the "intellectual landscape at large" as you might think. Feel free to throw some test-questions out if you wish to try me. I'm not a genius, but I think I rank a little higher than a middle-weight.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

essius December 3 2005, 02:40:56 UTC
Not if I don't have any notion, other than slight connotative indications from its prefix, as to its specific pejorative denotation.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up