Reasons I adore catalana, #2,991,322 in an ongoing series

[autographedcat]

Online conversation from today, discussing potentially problematic questions on an exam she'd given:

autographedcat: Bonus question #2: "What do they mean, 'if a woodchuck could chuck wood'. Is there any point in calling it a woodchuck if it can't? Defend your answer, quote Sartre if necessary."
autographedcat: (i have no idea what class you're teaching right now. I'm just feeling exceptionally silly)
catalana: Logic
catalana: :)
autographedcat: Well, there you go, then. The Woodchuck question is completely applicable.
catalana: Sartre believes that existence precedes essence, i.e., that we can create ourselves into whatever we wish to be. Hence he would be perfectly fine with a woodchuck existing even if it couldn't chuck wood.
catalana: Aren't you glad you asked? :)

Comments

[gingicat]

*giggle*

[legoline.livejournal.com]

That's one brilliant conversation :)

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

Is there any point in calling it a woodchuck if it can't?

Certainly. The name "would chuck" clearly speaks to M. monax's intent, not its actual capability.

A "can chuck" plays hockey for Vancouver.

[markbernstein.livejournal.com]

Other great philosophers weigh in:

Decartes: I chuck, therefore I would.

Yoda: Chuck or chuck not, there is no would.

Jesus: Turn the other chuck.

[katyhh.livejournal.com]

Hahahah :) This is why I adore you *both* :))

[hitchhiker.livejournal.com]

:)

[batyatoon]

I'm glad you asked. :D