Re: [s-d] [s-b] Further consultations on the Sharpener

[Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Warrigal wrote:

> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 10:25 PM, Ed Murphy <emurphy42@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Billy Pilgrim wrote:
>>
>>>>  Below is Consultation 166. I assign it to Priest Murphy.
>>>> {Were any mackerel successfully destroyed by the Pencil Sharpener?
>>>>>> Unbeliever: comex
>>>>>> Arguments: The arguments in my previous consultation established that
>>>>>> if the Laser Printer worked (which it did) then the Pencil Sharpener
>>>>>> failed to specify its procedure concretely enough. Given the
>>>>>> fungibility of mackerel, "m30000 in the possession of comex" is
>>>>>> sufficiently specific, but "all mackerel created by the laser printer
>>>>>> is not." (If macks were non-fungible, the latter would be valid but
>>>>>> not the former; were this the case the Sharpener couldn't have been
>>>>>> built.}
>> NO, because the Laser Printer didn't work.
> 
> I find this Inconsistent.

Why?

_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss