|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 00:14:16 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>In article <qdicf2tkd1vfbj88rmtdtd44ahp1bithk3@xxxxxxx>,
> Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:21:31 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <hfnbf29bigsbgndc97kf4daknn7ae4scjb@xxxxxxx>,
>> > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:16:46 -0600, Virgil <virgil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <enj9f29ngo1k21std1159kfma3drdle1c5@xxxxxxx>,
>> >> > Lester Zick <dontbother@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On 29 Aug 2006 13:53:36 -0700, "MoeBlee" <jazzmobe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >Lester Zick wrote:
>> >> >> >> I didn't say I'd met anyone who assumes he knows everything entirely
>> >> >> >> just assorted mathematikers who assume they know everything there is
>> >> >> >> to know about what little they assume they know. In the trade
>> >> >> >> they're
>> >> >> >> called neo platonic mystics. In other words a crank by any other
>> >> >> >> name.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Mathematicians are neo platonic mystics. If only I had realized that
>> >> >> >before. That trumps anything anyone could say, and makes it perfectly
>> >> >> >understandable that you desire to remain as ignorant as possible of
>> >> >> >mathematical logic, set theory, and all the associated mathematics.
>> >> >> >Now
>> >> >> >I just wish I could wash my own mind of what little I've so far
>> >> >> >learned
>> >> >> >about those subjects.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Which if truth be the gauge appears to be very little indeed.
>> >> >
>> >> >As Zick keeps seeing truth, or falsehood, where there is none, it is a
>> >> >gauge by which Zick is himself miniscule.
>> >>
>> >> Which is considerably more than your own. What's so confusing here is
>> >> that if there is no truth or falsehood to what you say then why do you
>> >> even bother to say it?
>> >
>> >There are forms of speech to which the "true/false" dichotomy does not
>> >apply, interogatories, imperatives, and exclamations among them.
>>
>> Is there a definition mood?
>
>The imperative mood covers the giving of directions or definitions:
Which is about all neomathematikers are good for.
>"Let 'A' represent 'B' " is in the imperative mood.
>
>It is like the assignment statement in some computer languages.
>E.g., 'x := 2' assigns and 'x = 2' tests.
So neomathematikers are like computers giving directions? That's rich.
>> >When Zick requires such forms to be either true or false, he is asking
>> >for the impossible.
~v~~
|
|