9. May 2010 by Raleigh Miller.

Suppose in circumstance C I experience phenomena p to degree n where n>0.  Nothing unusual about C is novel in its contribution to p, and the degree to which I experienc p is pretty normal.

Suppose p is annoying.

Suppose at the onset of event E, I enter a new circumstance, C’, the degree to which I experience p is increased by degree m, where m is noticeable but not very significant.

In these circumstances, I feel inclined to get angry at E for p. Not p to degree o, where m-n=o, but p, period.

Effectively I blame the event for the fact of the annoyance’s existence, even though I would have experienced p only slightly less should E not have happened.

Does anyone else do this? Is there a name for this? There should be.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

4. May 2010 by Raleigh Miller.

This isn’t the most impressive flashmob you’ll find, but it’s the only one with respect to which I can have a reaction somewhat akin to pride.

Is it weird that the older I get, the more enjoyment I get out of people randomly breaking out into song and dance?

Also, I’m glad that I get to be an Ohio State student for a half a decade or so. I feel pretty lucky.

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

3. May 2010 by Raleigh Miller.

“This sentence is false”

• If the sentence is false, then it’s true, but in that case it’s not the case that it’s false, so it’s false.

“Suppose Gamma is the set of all sets that aren’t members of themselves.  Is gamma a member of itself?”

• If Gamma is a member of itself, then it isn’t the case that Gamma is one of the sets that aren’t members of themselves, so it doesn’t belong in Gamma…but in that case, it’s not a member of itself, and as a set that isn’t a member of itself, then it belongs in Gamma.

Here’s something that is disanalogous, but of an interestingly similar spirit.S: “If I’m not mistaken, p.” Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »