Skip to main content

The First Time Out of Five, Part Two

Image result for venn diagram notation

Some possible answers to this occurred to him.  One was simply, "Yes." Or, more broadly, "Yes, I hear you." After all, the only actual question he had been asked was whether he had heard the insinuating statement about the handwriting. He had heard it, so strictly a "yes" was a full and fair answer.

But "yes" alone could be interpreted as meaning "yes, I wrote that." Even "yes, I hear you" without more could be interpreted as something like, "yes, I wrote it and I'm glad you appear to have enjoyed the wit of it." That would never do.

He also thought quite briefly of a response that would be suitable for a math class. He could go to the blackboard, grab a piece of chalk, and draw two circles, labeling them A and B. They would NOT intersect. He could then explain to her and to the whole class that set A consisted of everything he had ever done or contributed to in any way whatsoever, and set B consisted of all letter to any teacher with any reference to a bomb in them.

He would then write the symbolism for the intersection of A and B being the null set. But no ... too complicated and confrontational.

So he said this: "Yes, ma'am I heard you. The letter has nothing to do with me; I had nothing to do with it."

She seemed instantly deflated by this, asking only, "Are you sure?"

"Yes."

She had to go on to actually teaching the class material for the day and leaving him be. Whether she continued her Nancy Drew like efforts in some other context, what person or group of persons were actually responsible for that letter ... he would never know of that.

But he would know from that point on that he HAD said the right thing, so it was possible for him to say the right thing in critical moments.

Not very many though. That was just the first out of five. 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere.  At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak...
24 comments
Read more

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.   We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a maj...
10 comments
Read more

The Growing Block Theory of Time

My own disposition, in regard to the philosophy of time, is toward the "growing block" theory. This is the view that past events remain realities, that present-moment events are also realities, but that future events are not yet real. The image is of the universe as a block with an edge on (say) the right-hand side. The block is expanding because that edge is moving ever further right, and that edge is what we call the present, or, simply, "now." Everything to the left of that edge is both static (the past is complete) and, still and forever, real. Think of the phrase "the moving finger writes." The chief alternatives to the growing-block theory are "presentism" (only the now-edge itself is real) and "eternalism" (past, present, and future are all real." I believe that time is a growing block because (1) that's what it feels like, (2) we should stick with the introspective phenomenon unless we have good reason to abandon ...
8 comments
Read more