3 ms·

For the fun of it, try an embedded factoid: 'blueprint' is happy to have committed some atrocity X (without negating X)

• blueprint 8y ago
  Huh? Do you know what happy means
  • escherplex 8y ago
    Nah, that's a corollary to Popper's observation of a problem with all 'definitions' in that terms are defined using terms which themselves remain undefined which points to an implicit universal subjectivity, which contemporary phenomenology inspired by Husserl attempts to skirt. The above was a counterargument used on a HS hacker classmate's contention that any and all questions could be formulated requiring only a yes/no true/false answer. Prefixing a malicious factoid with a requisite subjective judgment and requiring a categorical response illustrates an ill-formed [but possible] question incapable of being affirmed or negated by any respondent.
    • blueprint 8y ago
      As long as happiness and subjectivity are not well defined by the asker, answers to questions formulated using such definitions necessarily seem to them to be ill-defined...