"Escapism"
Isn't everything that one does in his waking and sleeping moments, an escapism from himself?we watch TV, socialise with people, listen to music, drink, smoke etc etc only because we cannot stand the thought of being alone. does that mean we cannot stand ourselves? what is it about aloneness?...
posted by Mudit @ 1:18 PM
5 comments
5 Comments:
"If the converse of a statement is absurd, the original statement is an insult to the intelligence and should never have been said."
- Boultbee's Criterion
That was insightful, and on careful examination makes so much sense. I wonder. . . what would be the converse of your post.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Converse of an assertion is only a negation to the given assertion. e.g. , converse(a man) = “not” a man. Two NOTs make a yes, like, “ (not ) not a man” is “a man”. And hence, the converse to Boultbee’s criterion is :
“If converse of a statement is NOT absurd, the original statement is an insult to the intelligence and should never have been said."
OR
"If the converse of a statement is absurd, the original statement is NOT an insult to the intelligence."
If you look closely, both these statements are not absurd, and both contradict the original criterion. Hence either Boultbee’s criterion holds true or it is an absurd statement as then the converse holds true !! (I’ll leave that decision to you ;-) )
A slight variation from Manish’s view, I propose the following converse to the original post by Mudit:
"everything that one does in his waking and sleeping moments, is NOT escapism from himself"
Converse of an assertion is only a negation to the given assertion. e.g. , converse(a man) = “not” a man. Two NOTs make a yes, like, “ (not ) not a man” is “a man”. And hence, the converse to Boultbee’s criterion is :
“If converse of a statement is NOT absurd, the original statement is an insult to the intelligence and should never have been said."
OR
"If the converse of a statement is absurd, the original statement is NOT an insult to the intelligence."
If you look closely, both these statements are not absurd, and both contradict the original criterion. Hence either Boultbee’s criterion holds true or it is an absurd statement as then the converse holds true !! (I’ll leave that decision to you ;-) )
A slight variation from Manish’s view, I propose the following converse to the original post by Mudit:
"everything that one does in his waking and sleeping moments, is NOT escapism from himself"
Post a Comment
<< Home