virus: Nothing

Reed Konsler (
Sat, 20 Feb 1999 16:31:03 -0500

>Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 19:17:09 -0500
>From: "joe dees" <>
>Subject: Re:virus: Re: virus-digest V3 #48
>>Really? Your philosophy lacks imagination.
>No, Daniel C. Dennett's philosophy must lack imagination, for it's his example.

I know. I read his books. Dennett is one bad ass philosopher. My favorite is _The Intentional Stance_.

But you are quoting him out of context, which makes you, not him, the author of the idea you are trying to convey. I don't know what Dan would say about these convesations...he might think they are a waste of time, or he might look upon them the way a professional artist looks on the work of the amature. I hope he would see us with a kind eye...but nobody knows what he would think, do we?

Stop cowering behind authority.

>>"Unexpressed anger yields unsettling dreams."
>>A possible translation. What did you intend when you said
>>it? Did you mean nothing at all? In that case:
>Stretches the bounds of poetic metaphor past the breaking point.
>Not everything's a koan, Reed.

[shrug] Sez you. You gonna try and back up that unsupportable assertion or let it lay there like a dead fish?

>>" [the sound of one hand clapping] "
>>is a better translation. There are an infinte number of
>>grammatical ways to communicate nothing. Take care,
>>or you might find they comprise most of what you say.
>I'll try not to follow your example in this respect.

That's obvious. My question is, why? Why are you picking a fight with me? I'm just telling you what I think. You seem to be trying to prove yourself in some test of minds. If that is the case, you can't win. I believe what I am're just debating. The only person who can be shaken from their course is you. Now, if you were to match your belief against mine, then the outcome is both uncertian and more fruitful for everyone.

>BTW, isn't the definition of a meaningless statement that,
>since it is neither true nor false, that it communicates
>nothing? (Those sounds are your own petard hoisting
>you, and the ball falling unplayably in your court).

Well, your play has so far been handicapped by similar delusions. I agree that a statement communicating nothing is neither true nor false, but this does not mean that a statement which is neither true nor false is meaningless. It's not..transitive, commutative, I forget the word...

If [A, then B] does not equal [If B then A].

Come on grasshopper, you can do better than that.

>>Nothing is simple, but nothing else is.
>And nothing is unstable.

You do understand! That was great!

Nothing is simple, nothing is unstable, nothing is also boundless and infinite, but nothing else is.

Can you sense that?

>As I have counter-demonstrated, you were wrong
>about being right. Don't sweat it too much, Reed;
>it happens to the self-believed best of us - even to you.

The isn't over yet, is it? I still warming up.


  Reed Konsler