News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on What impossible meant to Richard Feynman. Parent comment

Re:What impossible meant to Richard Feynman by SavantIdiot on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @01:31PM (#29395627)
No. It is not obvious. That's the whole point of this discussion.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What impossible meant to Richard Feynman by leephillips on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @01:56PM (#29395939)
It’s not obvious? So there is a chance “that’s beautiful” means that the person showing him the painting is beautiful? I’m mystified.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What impossible meant to Richard Feynman by rspeele on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @03:40PM (#29397189)
> So there is a chance “that’s beautiful” means that the person showing him the painting is beautiful?

No, but I think the choice of adjective is important. Suppose instead of saying "That's a beautiful painting" I said "That's a masterful painting".

The sentence structure is the same. The adjective is still modifying "painting". I'm still saying the painting is good. But the word I chose more directly implies a judgement of the artist: I am describing the painting as the product of a master painter.

I get the same impression from hearing "stupid idea". Stupid is a description of intelligence, thinking ability, aptitude: attributes which lie with the idea's originator, not with the idea itself.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What impossible meant to Richard Feynman by FalconSensei on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @04:12PM (#29397524)
You wouldn't say "that's a stupid person" unless you were talking about a 3rd person
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What impossible meant to Richard Feynman by DiggyJohnson on Tuesday November 30, 2021 @02:00PM (#29396000)
How is that not obvious? Do you hold that position?
[ Parent | on HN ]