> If you take the benefit of the doubt on the part of the author of the verbose sentence, then it could be that each of the abstractions in it is relevant. I

> If you take the benefit of the doubt on the part of the author of the verbose sentence, then it could be that each of the abstractions in it is relevant. I get Feynmann's point, but you are absolutely right. I took a sociology class in symbolic interactionism years ago and what that original sentence is trying to stress is that: * We see symbols whose meaning and interpretation is socially determined. * Those symbols are visual but not always textual. The original sentence explains why when a person in a blue outfit with badges on the shoulders and a peaked hat yells, "Get down!" you lay on the ground with your hands over your head, but when a person in a spandex jumpsuit and wraparound shades says the same thing you start dancing. Feymann's sentence loses that meaning.