Re:You aren't getting any better
by define_eprime on Tuesday March 05, 2013 @09:36AM
(#5324654)
Has anyone ever defined E-prime in E-prime? The wikipedia page doesn't offer one but I'd imagine it would have to be a series of prolog-like assertions about E-prime. You obviously can't just say "E-prime is ..."
[ Parent
| on HN ]
E-prime begins with English and then removes the being verbs.
E-prime removes all conjugations of "to be" from English. <-- Not sure if quoting "to be" as a noun counts. :)
Re:You aren't getting any better
by define_eprime on Tuesday March 05, 2013 @10:59AM
(#5325192)
Shuzan held out his short staff and said, "If you call this a short staff, you oppose its reality. If you do not call it a short staff, you ignore the fact. Now what do you wish to call this?"
How does calling it a name oppose its reality? It still has a reality even if you concurrently give it a name.
Re:You aren't getting any better
by define_eprime on Tuesday March 05, 2013 @12:32PM
(#5325900)
Hofstadter's "Gödel, Escher, Bach" explains this well in chapter 9 (Mumon and Gödel). I believe the argument goes that by calling it a specific thing you "oppose the reality" of all the other things it also is - no single name will ever suffice. Closed world assumption and all that.