Page Summary
xanta.livejournal.com - (no subject)
sublevel3.livejournal.com - (no subject)
barking-watcher.livejournal.com - A little learning....
purplerabbits.livejournal.com - (no subject)
ducklofty.livejournal.com - (no subject)
ciphergoth.livejournal.com - Re: A little learning....
selectnone.livejournal.com - (no subject)
zotz - (no subject)
Style Credit
- Style: Neutral Good for Practicality by
Expand Cut Tags
No cut tags

no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 06:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 07:31 am (UTC)Not sure about that analysis though. Sometimes I feel critics can read too much into things and put their own slant on things, never intended by the author.
Think my analysis would be that Emily was of the priviledged classes of a certain time (Victorian or Edwardian) as I remember. I mean she had a shop, that didn't sell anything, so could quite obviously live off her substantial allowance. Waking up Bagpuss and his friends, would be no different to her than ringing the service bell, to get the downstairs staff to serve her tea, or plump her cushions or something. Not that Emily was just a lazy cow, but she didn't know any better. It was the way she was brought up, and a symptom of the time she was living in.
Anyway, I'm rambling and obviously making this up as I go along, lol.
A little learning....
Date: 2002-09-24 07:37 am (UTC)Feeling somewhat put out by the fact that I didn't know anything about Betrand Russell, I used Google to find some relevant websites. Up until this point I tended to believe that a little learning never hurt anyone that was until I read the following..
Russell discovered the paradox which bears his name in May 1901, while working on his Principles of Mathematics (1903). The paradox arose in connection with the set of all sets which are not members of themselves. Such a set, if it exists, will be a member of itself if and only if it is not a member of itself.
I am trying to wrap my inadequate brain like powers around this concept but considering I left school with a CSE in Arithmetic I'm not coping too well. I think I'm better off day-dreaming about clockwork mills that can make chocolate biscuits out of breadcrumbs and butterbeans.
no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 07:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 07:47 am (UTC)Re: A little learning....
Date: 2002-09-24 08:59 am (UTC)Some adjectives describe other words. "Bisyllabic" is an example, it describes words like "butter" and "football", but not "peg" or "antidisestablishmentarianism".
Some such adjectives have the weird property that they describe themselves: the best example is "pentasyllabic", but others include "recherche". We'll call such adjectives "autonomic", because they name themselves. If they don't name themselves, we call them "heteronomic". So "pentasyllabic" is autonomic, but "bisyllabic" is heteronomic.
The question Russell asks, put in this form: is "heteronomic" heteronomic?
no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 10:52 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-09-24 02:06 pm (UTC)Now, this Postage chap - wasn't he Smallfilms? If so, Tom tried (and failed) to get his daughter to join SFsoc at the Societies' fair one year.