Comments:

Blogaholic - 2004-12-17 07:15:13
Hi, Just a note on the "violation" of (or non-alignment to) logic:- I agree with you that it would be fine for one to "violate" the logic (here linguistic logic is clearly meant) in both legal and ethical terms. However, should one consider the meta-message behind such a claim, the use of words "violate" and "the differences of human beings from [sthg]" are obviously more negative than neutral while concerning the almost universal *semantics*. Quoting from your blog entry, "�ڤ��|���Ҧ��H�����ݿ��u�A�A�i�H�{���u���ѩR�O�~�l�P�ɤS���O�~�l�v�A�ƦܥH���覡�P�O�H���q�A�]�����H�H�{���A���i�z��" looks sound (and in fact very much Lee-styled), and sounds logical; anyhow, the tricks are always there. Should one just leave it open and say "as you like", it can be sneaky enough to become a cynic; also, the real danger lying ahead is the tautology - should logic be just important for being important, how should one position it amidst such commonly-believed and -observed importance? Such difficulty in positioning can, even, result in the potential (plus eternal) problem with simply how to define what "logic" is. -a blogger.
-------------------------------

add your comment:

your name:
your email:
your url:

back to the entry - Diaryland