[lit-ideas] Topic/Focus -- Was: Popper on "Observation"
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:28:48 EDT
In a message dated 8/25/2004 6:11:57 AM Eastern Standard Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
is science valuable for producing tautolgies ['All swans are
white'] or isolated but striking observation statements ['Look there's a swan
with JLS on it, and look there's a bus with Mike Geary on it'? Or is it
rather more to be valued for producing theories of great generality and
explanatory power ['E=mc2'] that may nevertheless be tested, often
ingeniously, by some observation?
----
I would phrase the phrase differently:
"Look, Mike Geary is on that bus."
-- rather than the way McEvoy phrases it, with _the bus_ being the topic and
focus.
Note that it's the "look" that _presupposes_ (or implicates) that the
observation is striking. Cf.
"Here goes Mike Geary on that bus again"
does not strike me as 'striking' at all.
Cheers,
JL
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Topic/Focus -- Was: Popper on "Observation"