AI, as it evolves from Present to Future
— — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Just FYI, relevant to all groups:
The Home page of a group is presented first, by default, which only shows us a long list in reverse chronological order of every post made in every forum.
So upon first arrival to the group’s Home page, you should click on the Forum button to see the list of all topics.
100 percent analogy is a contradiction in terms. If there is no line of demarcation, no variation and no way to distinguish things being compared then it is not an analogy.
Seems to me speaker’s typically convey something negative when they point out a tautology. It is a needless repetition. Pointing out a tautology is a way to rebuke a speaker in a debate.
Analogy typically helps the listener to understand a concept that might be opaque. “Oh it is like that. Well i know about that. So now it is like this and like that. I understand this so i understand that.”
I would like to quibble…I might be wrong so won’t swear on the holey bibble….but would a 100% analogy not be an ‘identity’? A tautology is a statement true by its logical form. An analogy that matched in every respect would simply describe the same thing twice?
You are right on all counts, Reg. A 100 percent perfect analogy is an “identity”, namely The Law of Identity, as in A is A, a thing is what it is. And because it is Non-Contradictory, it is true by logical form and thus a tautology.
As Saturday Night Live observed in the commercial:
Floor Wax = New Shimmer™ = Dessert Topping.
And again quoting Euclid:
“Two things equal to the same thing are equal to each other,”
When it comes to tautologies, either I’m being pedantic, or I’m not being pedantic. As for similes, what are they like?
Shhhh! Don’t say it too loud around QAnon-ers that you are pedantic. QAnon-ers don’t have a vocabulary that goes as far as yours, so they may mistake a friendly but annoying trait with something truly evil, albeit not found in evidence where they think.
Oh, and when you see a Qanon-er withe the logo WWGOWGA (“When We Go One, We Go All”) just wave and say “‘Bye!” and point to the nearest manhole or ditch.
As for similies, John Prince observed that Kentucky similies may not be mentionable in polite society, though his similies were quite entertaining. “It’s A Big Ol’ Goofy World.” A-Huk!
I know I may have posted this video earlier, but since we’re talking about 100 perfect analogies, The Law of Identity, and Tautologies, well. It Is What It Is!
😁=😁
100 percent analogy is a contradiction in terms. If there is no line of demarcation, no variation and no way to distinguish things being compared then it is not an analogy.
Recall, I said: “Obviously, no analogy is 100 percent perfect, otherwise, it would be a tautology.”. So we are saying the same thing, only differently.
By the way, my words on analogy and tautology above are, by the power invested in me by the town of Kookieville, public domain. You, Reg, and others may use them without attribution.
Seems to me speaker’s typically convey something negative when they point out a tautology. It is a needless repetition. Pointing out a tautology is a way to rebuke a speaker in a debate.
A speaker can use a tautology to emphasize the reality and Non-Contradictory nature of his subject to doubters, with further elaboration to follow. Whether it is negative is the opinion of the beholder.
There’s nothing wrong with a tautology. It’s just that, by itself, it’s not explanatory.
Example used in a sentence with an embedded sentence: “‘Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.’ said Sigmond Freud in reference back to his application of the term ‘phallic symbol.'”.
The explanation of the source and reference of the tautology helps make the subject of the tautology more clear. (Hoo-boy! You won’t find this on Schoolhouse Rock! 🚭🍆🥒🥕😁)
Analogy typically helps the listener to understand a concept that might be opaque. “Oh it is like that. Well i know about that. So now it is like this and like that. I understand this so i understand that.”
You are correct. Sir. Analogies are indeed helpful when the imparted new knowledge of the speaker or writer fits in with the context of previous knowledge of the listener or reader (respectively.)
We’re all on the same page. It’s just we’re in different paragraphs. Or maybe one’s on the paper cut edge and one is fighting the silverfish and one is in the coffee spill. 😁
100 percent analogy is not analogy. Just is not. Identical twins are comparable and analogizable. (new word is like a neologism.) Yet they’re not identical and thus proper subjects. Once identity is evident it is properly tautology time. Never the twain shall meet..
“As for similes, what are they like?” If we can only answer a simile with a simile then similar and identical merge.
This is precisely what I’ve been saying. To use a simile of my own, looking for a 100 percent analogy is like sending some on a prank errand to buy a Non-Genetically Modified Seedless Watermelon. Doesn’t exist. (Nor for that matter does any Non-Genetically Modified food since the time humans have domesticated crops and livestock.)
This might be a fun prank to do with Palestinianists, since the watermelon is one of their symbols and Left-Wingers have a knee-jerk hate of Genetic Modification.
Identical twins are comparable and analogizable…Yet they’re not identical and thus proper subjects. Once identity is evident it is properly tautology time. Never the twain shall meet…
This is true. Even “identical” twins can have different placement of internal organs, among other differences.
(new word is like a neologism.)
It’s not just “like”. By the definition of Latin prefixes, root words, and suffixes, neologism and new word are identical. Or is your sense of humor as subtle and quintuple-smooth as Reg’s and mine?
“As for similes, what are they like?” If we can only answer a simile with a simile then similar and identical merge.
I’m sure someone of the Hippie Generation has tried, since they, like, put the word “like” in the middle of, like, every sentence, like, at least a few, like times, and, like, always, man!
🧔♀️🙋♀️☮️🧘🏼
