Sex and Paradoxes
May 3, 2011 12:01 PM Subscribe
Sex and Paradoxes
Sex and Paradoxes is a new tumblr I've started. It's pretty much exactly what it says it is. NSFW!
Sex and Paradoxes is a new tumblr I've started. It's pretty much exactly what it says it is. NSFW!
Role: maker
This being the internet I think you're going to run out of philosophical paradoxes before you run out of random pictures of naked girls.
posted by joannemullen at 9:22 PM on May 3, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by joannemullen at 9:22 PM on May 3, 2011 [3 favorites]
I love this.
posted by whimsicalnymph at 3:16 PM on May 8, 2011
posted by whimsicalnymph at 3:16 PM on May 8, 2011
Not with you on the shadow paradox (yes, I ...read... the whole thing!). Your first premise should be changed to "require a direct light source".
posted by flippant at 2:51 PM on May 15, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by flippant at 2:51 PM on May 15, 2011 [1 favorite]
Flippant: thanks! You're correct - I'm changing it now. And thanks for reading (!!)
posted by Lutoslawski at 2:26 PM on May 16, 2011
posted by Lutoslawski at 2:26 PM on May 16, 2011
I don't think this version of "Buridan's ass" works. The way my philosophy prof told it to us, there are two identical bales of hay that are equally far from the ass. By making them different (hay and water), you just distract from what should have been the problem: that they're identical, so the ass should be fatally paralyzed by indecision. I understand that you can specify whatever conditions you want since it's a hypothetical, and you've said the horse "goes to whatever sustenance is closest." But why complicate the simple? And the suggestion that it's not clear if the ass would die of "hunger" or "thirst" has no basis. If asses are like humans, the horse would die of thirst first, but that's for scientific reasons, not logical ones.
By the way, our prof's point was that rationality and randomness aren't mutually exclusive, since the rational choice when presented with identical food sources is to pick one at random.
posted by John Cohen at 6:05 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
By the way, our prof's point was that rationality and randomness aren't mutually exclusive, since the rational choice when presented with identical food sources is to pick one at random.
posted by John Cohen at 6:05 PM on May 19, 2011 [1 favorite]
John -
Good points. I think you're right. I'm actually going to change the post. When thinking of how to present it, I was actually bothered by the provision I had to add about "goes to whatever sustenance is closest,' which seems too artificial. So thanks.
posted by Lutoslawski at 10:25 AM on May 20, 2011
Good points. I think you're right. I'm actually going to change the post. When thinking of how to present it, I was actually bothered by the provision I had to add about "goes to whatever sustenance is closest,' which seems too artificial. So thanks.
posted by Lutoslawski at 10:25 AM on May 20, 2011
« Older Filthy Ditty: Daily text experiments in April 2011... | Lifelong EP... Newer »
posted by MT at 5:32 PM on May 3, 2011