Re: Disproof of the Halting Problem's Conclusion

From: >parr\(*> (KurlyGina_at_tenretnitb.moc)
Date: 07/24/04 

Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2004 14:02:46 +0000 (UTC)

"Will Twentyman" <wtwentyman@read.my.sig> wrote in message
news:40fe9402_2@newsfeed.slurp.net...
| Peter Olcott wrote:
| > "Kenneth Doyle" <nobody@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns952D9CBB490B0nobodynotmailcom@61.9.191.5...
| >>"Peter Olcott" <olcott@worldnet.att.net> wrote in
| >>news:EiiLc.292221$Gx4.63033@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:

| >>>I am not the best writer, and that is part of the problem.

| >>But Peter, you are a expert in semantics; remember? <...>
| >
| > It a well known fact that those that are good at logic/math
| > are not good a writing. It has to do with the size of the Corpus
| > Callosum.
|
| I'll have to go tell my wife to stop being good at one of them. I
| wonder which one she'll pick.

This little corner of the thread is becoming redolent with innuendo.

I suppose the spam merchants will be assailing us with 'Ashamed of
the size of your leetle corpus callosum?' next.

But seriously. Peter now asserts 'poor at writing' implies 'good at
logic'. And of course, that inevitbabbly leads to 'poor at logic'
implies 'good at writing'. I had the luck to be born good at logic.
When I was a child, I was not too good at writing. I had to work at
that skill. I suppose I was too stupid to measure the size of my
corpus callosum and realise that there's no way I could write well
and with clarity.

Sorry, Peter, I have just dashed your CC theory to scintillating
smithereens. I am both illogical and a poor writer. 

--
<º)&&PARR##sss==<(   Parr

Relevant Pages