[lit-ideas] A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 10:54:56 EDT
In a message dated 5/27/2010 4:28:17 A.M., jejunejesuit.geary2@xxxxxxxxx
writes:
"A rose is rose is a rose is a rose" is not a tri-tautology.
---
tetra-tautology?
No.
TRI-tautology. In Geary's algebra, the idea of "deja vu all over again"
should be strictly taken:
"a rose is a rose" --- bi-tautology. Since "mon-tautology", "a rose" is NOT
one.
"a rose is a rose is a rose" -- tri-tautology
"a rose is a rose is a rose is a rose" -- tetra-tautology.
Howevr, in Geary's algebra:
"I submit that what Speranza and St. Anselm ("Commentary on Plato's
Parmenides") calls "bi-tautology" is not such. Or rather, tautologous. I
propose
to refer to Speranza's bitautology as a monotautology. This yields Anselm's
tritautology as my bitautology, and, of course, their tetratautology as a
tritautology."
JLS
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] A rose is a rose is a rose is a rose - Jlsperanza
