Ge fanks bros..replies too short so il add this..

Mo froblem.

As a side note... here are some fun facts about peanuts.

:detective: Dr. George Washington Carver researched and developed more than 300 uses for peanuts in the early 1900s; Dr. Carver is considered "The Father of the Peanut Industry" because of his extensive research and selfless dedication to promoting peanut production and products.

:muscle: Tom Miller pushed a peanut to the top of Pike's Peak (14,100 feet) using his nose in 4 days, 23 hours, 47 minutes and 3 seconds.

:intentive: March is National Peanut Month. National Peanut Month had its beginnings as National Peanut Week in 1941. It was expanded to a month-long celebration in 1974.

:uo: What is supposedly the World's Largest Peanut is in Turner County. A 20 foot tall peanut, it is a monument to the importance of the peanut in Georgia history.

So me drinking six pints of guiness and four packets of peanuts and then pebble dashing my mums front room is not very interesting..???

glory for you." Alice is confused because that is not the context in which glory is used. Humpty replies "I meant there's a nice knock down argument for you!" Of course, we know that that's not what glory means. But Humpty basically replies "glory means whatever I mean it to mean."

Here is where this all addresses your comment. Alice states "The question is whether you can make words mean so many different things." That's the underline issue, which is not resolved as Humpty continues to use words that do not follow their accepted use and Alice gets flustered and leaves. But basically, Humpty Dumpty claims that the meaning of the words he used (i.e. un-birthday, glory, pay-it-forward, etc) are not constrained at all. If you compare that to Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels, where Gulliver goes to the academy, we understand the meaning of an expression by understanding its use.

So jgweed I think underlines a problematic account of semantics and perception.

Ya, But I believe most people nowadays will prefer to trust the meaning they believe oficial language gives to the words, rather than the meaning they think words should have. At least, most people I know and hear about seen to care too much for what is "right"

I think the first step in convincing a peanut that he is a man is giving the peanut the ability of being convinced about things

This makes me remember of another situation: A philosopher, Plato I think, once defined man as "feather-less biped". Then another philosopher whose name I forgot, who is very interesting by the way, brought him a feather-less chicken and declared "I brought you a man", forcing the first to change the definition to "feather-less biped with broad toe-nails"

But see the problem is in what the official meaning of a word is. I think the example of Humpty dumpty swings both ways, both in regards to how words can be unconstrained and at the opposite end of the spectrum constrained.

One of my favorite neo-feminist philosophers has a very good argument for the constrained meaning of a word. Stephanie Ross in How Words Hurt underlines the concept of a dead metaphor. Take for example the word "hysterical." To say, we use the term hysterical to refer to people that are funny, non-sensical, and people that make us laugh (as well as people that are a little nuts, so there is a double meaning in there). But etymologically, hysterical comes from the Greek word hystia, which basically means "women's ovaries." Now as time went on, the hurtful word hystericalB!tchbehind."

Second quote: I think you are forgetting the practical side a bit... its doesnt matters if you got a peanut that has more priori knowledge than deep thinker (The legendary computer that, even before having his memory banks activated, proved, through the reasoning of "I think, therefore I am", the existence of two kinds of food) if you cant communicate with it Thats what I meant.

Nobody yet has been able to convince me that 12:00AM and 12:00 PM are correct labels for each of those times. I think they should be the other way round ! :brickwall:

Deep thinker - Encyclopedia Dramatica

Maybe a more precise way to get around to the center of the problem is for you to elaborate on the question itself.

If you refer to, in your first post, "is there a way to convince a person that you are a peanut" and now " are 12:00 Am and 12:00 PM correct labels for each other," you are asking a semantic question centered in the philosophy of language.

Is this a metaphysical question? An existential question? A epistemological question? Since philosophy is a many tiered system, there are many different answers to the same problem.

Memester,
Sorry about that, mixed you and manored up. I think since you didn't enter the conversation until post #28 and the statement was formed in such a way that it seemed to continue another conversation, I mixed the two of you up. I know I probably shouldn't start another delineation, but what would be the nature of your view that would cause so much difficulty in it being changed?

Manored,
I've been meaning to look into "the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy" because it is referenced quite a few times here on the forum. I'll probably see the movie though.

Memester,
Sorry about that, mixed you and manored up. I think since you didn't enter the conversation until post #28 and the statement was formed in such a way that it seemed to continue another conversation, I mixed the two of you up. I know I probably shouldn't start another delineation, but what would be the nature of your view that would cause so much difficulty in it being changed?