> How do you falsify that statement, "colorless green ideas sleep
>furiously"? True and false do not even apply.
>(There might be a problem with agreeing on definitions for 'falsifiable',
>which I take to mean, "possibly true, but not necessarily true". But
>sometimes it gets interpreted it as either "not true" or "definitely
>refutable".)
>But when you said that commands are falsifiable since they are the same as
>questions since they are " implied questions", it's like saying day is the
>same as night since day implies night. If you can take anything and show
>how since it implies anything else, you are functioning off the meaningless
>tautological premise that "anything is anything".
>The difference between 'statements' and commands, exclamations, etc. is
>that statements say something directly about the "state" of affairs.
>Commands, exclamations, etc. just imply something indirectly about the
>state of affairs.
>--David R.
David,
I assume falsifiable to mean "stated as true". How do I refute Chomsky's
statement: If it is "stated as true", then I use the same criteria by which
it was stated (arbitrariness) and "state it as false".
As to implied questions: What is the difference between "Joe did go to the
store" and "Did Joe go to the store?"; perhaps a level of certainty, but the
statement is the same (the way I use the term "statement"...actually more
like "state of affairs" than you seem to use the term). So, to say that a
command implies a "question" is to misunderstand the word "question"...what
I meant to say is that a command is a phenomena as is a question (which is
to say that they differ from a statement--as you and Eva are using it to
mean something with quantities which have the appearence of being equal,
A=A, or at least having something on two sides of an equal sign...A=x,
x=A,--in that, as if they were an equation*, there is something missing
when both sides of the equal sign are compared ). Actually, a command is
more a half statement than is a question--which is "reverse"
statement--though both are looking for a compliment .
I can't really speak to A=A except to say that:
A
A equals A
A
translates to "there is a process whereby things exist in a state so that
they can occupy the exact same (extradimensional) space given that the form
remains balanced"... "A" implied?
*to me the important point is not that there is some material quality which
can be compared but that there is a form of comparison which can be shown
materially...what does the "equal sign" mean?!
Brett
Returning,
rBERTS%n
Rabble Sonnet Retort
Bizarreness is the essence of the exotic