Current Events > Do you want a topic on On Interpretation?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Every man is every animal ;)

The difficulty in setting out a program for any kind of creative endeavour is often linking it back to some tangible thin that can be the source of experience, where the endeavour must proceed outside of experiential learning since it treads new grounds and must be realized before being carried out. We will begin by looking at On Interpretation (Edgehill translation)

In Part 1 Aristotle outlines noun and verb, denial and affirmation, and proposition and sentence. This is the second stage of his Organon where prior to that Aristotle established categories as the starting point for more substantial inquiry. Nouns and verbs without anything added have no truth value.

Our example will be Fire Emblem. Fire Emblem taken on its own has no truth value.

In Part 2 Aristotle introduces compositionality: Fairsteed is a singular noun, but a fair steed named Fairsteed is a composite noun. Nouns are atemporal. He also introduces indefinite nouns, like not-man which refer to everything but the thing in question, since they do not point to definite things.

You can make it a composite by saying something like misunderstood attractive Fire Emblem. Or an indefinite noun that means anything but Fire Emblem, not-Fire Emblem. So much is basic so far.

In Part 3 Aristotle points out that verbs add temporality to nouns. Fire Emblem is healthy refers to the present, and so on with the tenses, so the misunderstood of misunderstood attractive Fire Emblem is not its own thing with meaning unless it is presented as being true or false, the consequence of which being that the misunderstood can only have meaning when it is applied to Fire Emblem at a specific time: Fire Emblem as a whole cannot be misunderstood. Part 4 expands on this somewhat.

You get a cookie if you know where I'm going with this

ugh. i though this would help me get closer to 100 presidents

...i'm not gonna give up yet