Archive for the ‘inanity’ Category

Linguistic Complexification

Wednesday, January 6th, 2010

There exist wondrous peculiarities to language, which allow for some truly bizarre linguistic constructs. As an individual who generally revels in confusion, discord and chaos, in addition to the use of parenthetical clauses and preambles, I am, of course, thrilled by linguistic constructs that either work in spite of seeming not to or don’t work in spite of seeming to.

In doing a spot of research while writing this particular post, I happened to discover that wikipedia has a pretty great list of linguistic example sentences, which I highly recommend mining for entertainment purposes.

Preamble aside, I have two particular constructs that I want to mention, one a sentence and the other a phrase:

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

That is, that that is is, that that is not is not is that it it is. That is, that that is is that that is not is not. Is that it? It is.

The latter of these two, I mention because its use in a recent episode of Rocketboom, which I’ve taken to watching, brought it to my mind. The former, I have known and loved for a while and mention because I have not done so in this space prior to now. There are, of course, plenty of other sentences that I enjoy for similar reasons, some involving “had” or “that”, that were excluded for the sake of brevity.

Please feel free to return your seats to their upright position and your televisions to the regularly scheduled program.

Posted in inanity | No Comments »

The truth about tomorrow

Sunday, September 27th, 2009

Tomorrow has not been yesterday yet for quite some time to be.

Posted in inanity | No Comments »

Snark Sharking

Thursday, July 30th, 2009

How much snark should a snark shark snark if a snark shark can snark snark?

A snark shark should snark as much snark as a snark shark can snark, if a snark shark can snark snark.

Posted in inanity | 2 Comments »

Further spyjinks

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

I am not currently at liberty to discuss where I have been or what I have been doing, which is not meant to imply or suggest that where I have been or what I have been doing is of sufficient importance or noteworthiness as to warrant or justify its serving as the topic for a discussion were I to be at liberty to discuss such matters, which I am not.

Posted in inanity | 1 Comment »

For the spies: 2009-01-26

Monday, January 26th, 2009

Sandwich the monkey Jesus.

Posted in inanity | No Comments »

Fenestration comes before Defenestration

Monday, December 29th, 2008

Did you know that there is a National Fenestration Rating Council? They rate windows.

Posted in inanity | 2 Comments »

Dinosaur Comics Helped me Find my Philosophy

Saturday, April 14th, 2007

Dinosaur Panpsychism Explanation I was reading Dinosaur Comics, as it is consistently one of the best comics on the Internet, and T-Rex was explaining panpsychism. Upon reading the first panel (included on the right for copyright violation purposes), I found myself thinking that panpsychism sounded an awful lot like my personal philosophy of the universe. Poking around wikipedia a bit more, as one is oft want to do, I came across a few other philosophical ideas. I don’t quite accept panpsychism, preferring the very similar hylopathism.

I feel safe describing my personal philosophy of the universe as hylopathism with weak emergence and an acceptance of the pathetic fallacy. Putting this in simpler terms, I believe that everything in the universe, from the smallest subatomic particle to the largest galaxy, is sentient, aware of and experiencing existence in its own way (hylopathism). All sentience and awareness within so-called higher beings emerges from and may be reduced to the constituent sentience of lower beings (weak emergence). I not only accept but revel in the attribution of human characteristics and emotions onto the inanimate; a small part of me is saddened when a rock is split in two because the atoms on the new surfaces have had their friends torn from them (pathetic fallacy).

I feel that the extension of hylopathism with weak emergence is much the same as strong panpsychism. The single mind that unites all things is simply an emergent entity composed of its sub-entities. To get existential for just a moment, we are all, one and the same within the all-being but, at the same, each our separate individual selves; our liver is at once the same entity as our heart and at the same a totally separate entity. Have you ever considered the sentient nature of your liver? How about the sentient nature of one of your brain cells? How about the sentient nature of one of the hydrogen ions released into your stomach acid? Hydrogen ions are very lonely creatures, a single proton trying as hard as it can to find a friend to share electrons with (loneliness is the pathetic fallacy sneaking in).

There you have it, I believe in hylopathism with weak emergence.

Posted in inanity, musings | No Comments »

Dear Fishy Agents

Monday, April 9th, 2007

Today’s codword is halibut.

Posted in inanity | 1 Comment »

If you please

Thursday, April 5th, 2007

The mockingbird flies south on Tuesdays.

Have you found the pattern yet?

Posted in inanity | No Comments »

Illusions

Friday, April 7th, 2006

The illusion of sandwiches can be a compelling thing.

Posted in inanity | No Comments »

The two monkeys walk into a bar joke

Monday, March 6th, 2006

Two monkeys walk into a bar.

The first monkey says, “Eek, eek!”

The second monkey says, “My good barkeep, my compatriot here will have a banana daquiri and I shall have a glass of your finest whisky.”

And the bartender replies, “He he, monkeys!”

Posted in inanity | 1 Comment »

FYI (badgers)

Thursday, December 29th, 2005

When removing the last badger from the jar, a spatula is your friend. However, when dealing with canned badger, the best method is to cut around the bottom of the can and push the contents out.

Posted in inanity | 3 Comments »