.

And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again? Archilochus

Sunday, November 29, 2015

Mind Yur U-Knits!

If you praise the rose, this means you blame the darkness,
In addition, if you recollect the glitter of ancient swords, you blame the peace,
And when you mention jasmine often and you laugh: then you attack the regime
- Mahmud Darwish, "The Rhymed Orations of the Dictator"

10 comments:

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

So, how many trees does it take to make a forest?

Mereological nihilism, heh.

Joe Cameltoe said...

More than one?

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

I'm sure we get to grove then glade before forest.

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

But then we wouldn't see the trees. ;)

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

ARen't groves and glades "parts" of forests? ;)

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

Yea but how many groves and glades? ;)

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

Are we in the weeds or in the woods?

-FJ the Dangerous and Extreme MAGA Jew said...

I still can't see the forest for the trees... :(

(((Thought Criminal))) said...

Yep. Mereological nihilism all the way down.

Joe Conservative said...

Plato, "Cratylus"

SOCRATES: Nor can we reasonably say, Cratylus, that there is knowledge at all, if everything is in a state of transition and there is nothing abiding; for knowledge too cannot continue to be knowledge unless continuing always to abide and exist. But if the very nature of knowledge changes, at the time when the change occurs there will be no knowledge; and if the transition is always going on, there will always be no knowledge, and, according to this view, there will be no one to know and nothing to be known: but if that which knows and that which is known exists ever, and the beautiful and the good and every other thing also exist, then I do not think that they can resemble a process or flux, as we were just now supposing. Whether there is this eternal nature in things, or whether the truth is what Heracleitus and his followers and many others say, is a question hard to determine; and no man of sense will like to put himself or the education of his mind in the power of names: neither will he so far trust names or the givers of names as to be confident in any knowledge which condemns himself and other existences to an unhealthy state of unreality; he will not believe that all things leak like a pot, or imagine that the world is a man who has a running at the nose. This may be true, Cratylus, but is also very likely to be untrue; and therefore I would not have you be too easily persuaded of it. Reflect well and like a man, and do not easily accept such a doctrine; for you are young and of an age to learn. And when you have found the truth, come and tell me.