Thursday, March 6, 2008

Please do Something About This

I just received an email informing me that The Police have added a second show at Jones Beach... uh... I'm sorry, I meant Nikon at Jones Beach Theater for August. Hasn't this "reunion tour" nonsense gone on long enough? Shouldn't Stewart Copeland have kicked Sting's aged ass by now?

And the worst part is that Elvis Costello is the opening act. I'm still an Elvis fan, but you know that this will mean an encore "Tea in the Sahara" duet. Barf.

At least Sammy Hagar is not in sight (yet?).

14 comments:

bones said...

I am actually trying to get tickets for this. Not this exact show but at PNC Arts Center.
Long Island is for jerks!

Anonymous said...

I'm gonna through up.

Spiros said...

Bones: Long island is for Billy Joel.

Did you see the Police last time? We they any good? Is Sting going to die soon?

Spiros said...

Anon: Excellent. Vomit for Justice.

bones said...

I didn't go the last show. PBK and Amy went. They said it was really good.
Sting is absolutely going to die soon. That is why I would like to attend his "Farwell To Earth" show.


-If you live on Long Island, You are a jerk
-Billy Joel lives on Long Island
-Therefore Billy Joel is a talentless hack

Spiros said...

Seeing the Police is a huge risk-- if they suck, it'll ruin them for me. I'd rather just not go than run the risk. And I hate Sting. I hate Bono more, though.

Re your argument:

-If you live on Long Island, You are a jerk
-Billy Joel lives on Long Island
-Therefore Billy Joel is a talentless hack

The premises are true, and the conclusion is true, but the inference form the premises to the conclusion is invalid (viz., not truth-preserving). So the argument is invalid (and thus unsound). A way to make it valid (and sound) would be to change the conclusion to "Therefore Billy Joel is a jerk."

but, as old Aristotle taught us, one does not need a demonstration of that which is self-evident...

Anonymous said...

Aristotle teachings via Spiros = Educational Justice.

Spiros said...

Aristotle = hardcore. And he was into pony play.....

bones said...

ok how about this

All people named Billy Joel are talentless hacks

Billy Joel is named Billy Joel

Therefore Billy Joel is a talentless hack

Spiros said...

Bones:

A lot turns on what you think the right analysis of proper names is. And we must not lose sight of the use/mention distinction. To wit:

Your first premise should run:

All people named 'Billy Joel' are talentless hacks. [Note the inverted commas, indicating that you're talking about the *name*, not the thing the name refers to (if, indeed names refer at all...)]

The the second premise should say:
Billy Joel is named 'Billy Joel'

And the conclusion is then ok:
Therefore Billy Joel is a talentless hack

Well done!

bones said...

I see what you mean. See now if my english teacher in high school only taught with examples like this, then I may have retained more.
I just had to look for that key on the keyboard.

Spiros said...

Compare:

The cat is on the mat.

'Cat' has three letters.

bones said...

in the first sentence the cat is refering to the animal

in the second `cat` is refering to the word

Spiros said...

Right. But note that:

"Cat has three letters" makes no sense (unless you imagine the inverted commas).