With Unfogged relaunching as a bona fide magazine, should we expect your staff to expand?
Note how the announcement is cleverly timed to coincide with an extended series on Heidegger designed to give the new magazine intellectual heft.
Well then, I'd like to be on it. I know you have a limited number of positions, but I'm flexible.
You've just missed the add/drop period, but I think we can let you audit.
That's terrific, ogged. Thanks for being so receptive. I'll do you proud, I promise.
I was expecting to start at the bottom and work my way up, you see.
Ogged. You know I'm well rounded. Please consider my application. I think you'd find me satisfying in any position.
FYI: I don't think you actually qualify as new media unless you have a WWWA ticker running.
should we expect your staff to expand?
I think it's finally time to hire Kaus.
Every time someone reads Kaus, an angel dies. I'm not sure which way this weighs for ogged.
I don't know PG, we're Big Media now. Whatcha got?
What? Last week's sunburn wasn't enough for you?
Oh, for a blog it was more than enough. Big Media.
Ogged is probably thinking page three girl–type stuff.
Where has girl27 gone? Maybe there's a big story in that.
Even if there isn't, you're big media now. Make one up.
I'm willing to leave things to PG's imagination.
Ah, but I'm not going to post Big Media type stuff to my blog, so you'll have to invite me to be a pinup here to see what I'll do!
PG, will you please be the pinup for the Unfogged Web Magazine?
I really don't see what the drawbacks to taking her up on that invitation could be, ogged.
Why thank you for the offer. It would be an honor.
(sneaks off to figure out what to do next ...)
I didn't know you spoke Frussian, Michael.
Ogged, if pg backs out, I'm available. How much would you pay me to tattoo Unfogged.com across my forehead?
Standpipe, I'll show you my Prime Mover if you'll show me yours.
I would like one of you honkies to write a rap involving the phrase "uncaused cause". You can include the variant "uncaused 'cause" if you like.
You can include the variant "uncaused 'cause" if you like.
Do the spare inverted commas affect scansion?
It makes it a shortening of "uncaused, because".
I'll show you my Prime Mover if you'll show me yours.
Admit it, you want to put your necessary in my sufficient.
They have evil-alien-mecha sheep?
Admit it, you want to put your necessary in my sufficient.
Mmm-hmm, 'cause sufficient implies necessary, and that's no sin.
Sufficient does no such thing. To confession with you.
Yeah, I noticed that last night.
So, SB, if a sufficient condition is one which, if true, implies that a result is true, and a necessary condition is one which must be true if the result is true, then how does the truth of a sufficient condition not imply the truth of a necessary condition?
None but SB can speak for SB, but your explication in 44 isn't what I took you to be saying in 40 or SB to be disagreeing with in 41. Rather I took "sufficient implies necessary, and that's no sin" to mean that if x is sufficient then it is necessary. Not suggesting that was your meaning, but it is a fairly standard reading of what you said.
Oh. Well, that's not what I meant at all.
I thought you were arguing that "p is sufficient for q" implies "p is necessary for q", which is plainly false.
What I take you to be saying now is that, if p is sufficient for q, and p holds, then all conditions r necessary for p also hold, in particular q. Of course that's right, but it's not, for me, the first-leaping-to-mind interpretation of "sufficient implies necessary".
Sufficient [things] [if true] implies necessary [things]. Why can't you read what I mean, instead of what I write?
Since inability to properly understand the sufficient/necessary distinction is a problem a lot of people on the LSATS, and that inability isn't present here, I officially propose that we start "The Unfogged LSAT Tutoring and Cock Joking School."
Plus writing something obviously correct would have obviated the point, which was to write something that could be abbreviated "SIN".
48, but why suppose there exist such conditions for which p is necessary? It should be possibile that there exists only a sufficient condition, resulting inq, and that is all? If so, SIN is wrong.
For all p, p is necessary for p.
It's true—ever tried to p when you don't have any p? You just stand there looking foolish.
Therefore, for all p, there exists a q such that p is necessary for q.
Michael—does that answer your question?
Since p->p seems pretty plausible, I should hope so.
This must be what it's like when your kid grows up to look nothing like you.
Glad someone finally noticed the alt text.
Actually the alt text says "Unfogged.com" or something equally uninteresting. The title text, now, that's worth paying mind.
Theory: Standpipe connected via a text browser.
What kid?
Also, by "alt" I meant whatever causes text to appear next to a hovering mouse pointer. Hooray for learning something new.
So the blog's grown up to look nothing like you? Good to know.
I'm sorry, but what in the world are you people talking about? Where can I see this alt text?
Hover your mouse over the main "unfogged" graphic on the front page.
Ogged, I was planning to track you down using the clues you've left as to your location, with a printout of the blog to help me recognize you.
Hover your mouse over the picture at the top of the main page.
You could probably get a grant for that, Ben.
Is the remark about the family-resemblance-lacking kid connected to the one about noticing the alt text, or does it refer to the debate over implication?
Tracking you down, or typing faster than you?
Ah ok. I was confused because I expected my arrow to turn into a little pointing hand, but now I see it.
"I expected my arrow to turn into a little pointing hand"
Maybe you just don't swing that way?
You mean you don't often argue settled points of logic for fun? You don't know what you're missing. Have you heard about this disjunction thing they have? Its elimination rule is wicked phat.
Don't start with me on disjunction elimination, SB. Relevance logic in your face!
A wise man once said, "Don't start none, won't be none."
Yo mamma necessarily so fat in all possible worlds.
Yo mamma so fat, she is a possible world.
Yo mama so shaggy, she ain't that shaggy.
Yo mamma so fat, she's closed under union.
Hey ... don't steal my jokes, Joe.
Don't whine Ben. Remember:
So when the sucker MCs try to chump my style
I let em know that I'm versatile
No harm intended. I figured everyone knew it was yours.
I wasn't even alive when "Rapper's Delight" was released, man.
Potholes in your lawn, Ben? Think of it as part of the Pierre Menard project.
I think I know what comes next: pwned!!
Why must you be such a little bitch, Weiner?
Canonically "lying, hurtful" (oddly that one doesn't picked up the "hung like a horse" instance).
Check this proposition,
Gonna break your resistance:
Ex falso quodlibet?
Don't need it.
I'm freakin' your derivation—
My logic's paraconsistent.
It was elsewhere in the "I Suspect Not" thread. Anyway, touché, and it's only in the spirit of total pettiness that I'm going to call you on "doesn't picked up."
Yeah, I'm loud and pround.
Google's index of the site is incomplete, which is why I keep the MT search.
I'm like Vlad,
You're suffering impalement.
Your argument's sad,
you need to read Entailment.
Like the Dog,
who used disjunctive syllogism,
Your weblog,
will drink its funky fill of... shit, can't think of a way to end this.
(The reference to the Dog makes sense if you've read Entailment, trust me.)
Corrections:
line 2: "your shit's sad"
line 7: "You're in a fog"
line 8: "you'll drink your funky..."
I suggest ending it with the word "euphemism". As in the great PopCanon song "Ironica": "When I said you smelled like monkey jism, I meant it as a euphemism".
Ironically, wikipedia says that the Big Bank Hank, putative author of the lines in 89, might himself have been a plagiarist.
True dat. But is that not the best rhyme for "disjunctive syllogism" ever? Give it up.
(Did I ever mention that the only English phrase that has all the same meanings as "aufheben" is "give up" used as in "give up the funk"? That one's for you, Ogged.)
Strictly speaking, that "ironically" should occur elsewhere in the sentence.
I like the "aufheben" thing, Matt. I'll run it by my Hegel people.
Not really. I've heard that before, but I don't find the evidence cited too convincing; Casanovas were a prominent gang at the time, IIRC from the liner notes to the Sugar Hill Records story.
100: The thing is that the phrase occurs more than once on the page, so Google only shows one occurrence, which happened not to be the classic one.
But Weiner, you didn't actually rhyme "disjunctive syllogism".
In the spirit of 106, a Texan of my acquaintance maintained that the only proper translation for a particular Greek word was "fixin'", as in, I'm fixin' to do such-and-such. But how can "give up" mean "annihilate"?
It's not ironic that wikipedia should say that, is it? I agree with 107.
Hopefully, Weiner will go easy on me.
"Hopefully"? I don't play that shit. Utterance modifiers rool!
how can "give up" mean "annihilate"?
I was trying to figure this out for myself, but I see now that that was stupid. Weiner?
Perhaps I meant that it had all the meanings of aufheben I could think of at the time. Perhaps I was going to cite "give up the ghost" as well. Perhaps I was talking smack. Perhaps my confusion was backward-caused by w-lfs-n's little-bitchiness in dissing my rhyme for "disjunctive syllogism." It's a mystery.
I didn't diss your rhyme, I merely pointed out that you had failed to create a rhyme on the phrase in question.
I can't tell whether you're mind too fining or not.
The title of this article is another candidate for whitest (but, by no means unstoic) sentence ever.
There's also a Homer Simpson quote:
I used to rock all night and party every day, then it was every other day, now I'm lucky if I can find half an hour a week in which to get funky.
I've gotta get out of this rut and back into the groove!
Fewer cock jokes at the Unfogged Reading Group.
The End of the Blog is seriously nigh. This blog, anyway.
I'll probably change that, but I'm tired, and it came to mind...