3 ms·
They are not mutually exclusive statements, because they don't exist in isolation: they are both potentially true and false depending on the context of discussi
by inopinatus 2y ago
They are not mutually exclusive statements, because they don't exist in isolation: they are both potentially true and false depending on the context of discussion.
- Feathercrown 2y agoBut they assert whether or not something exists, as an absolute statement. Maybe TCP packets don't exist in a particular situation, but there is still such a thing as a TCP packet in that case.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- saghm 2y agoThis seems like it's either a linguistic or philosophical question; either I don't interpret the words "such a thing" in a way that the author meant it, or I have a divergent different philosophical worldview on the concept of "existence" from the author's own view. Either way, this stuck out to me because usually these type of lists have very simple, understandable statements that just happen to surprise some people by not being true; in this case, the statements themselves are confusing, so I can't really say for certain whether I believe them or not because I don't even know what truth they're asserting to try to negate it.
- inopinatus 2y ago> these type of lists have very simple, understandable statements I would classify these statements as koans, and further observe that one of the defining characteristics of these lists is that they are wry. With that in mind the couplet is evidently presented in cheek to illustrate the need for context, since this is the pathway to resolve the overt contradiction without getting stuck in a rigid thinking trap.