Heathrow, Eastercon, 2010
Convention hotel.
'I'll show you the life of the mind.'
Keep going.
Full coverage.
Better truth through advertising.
Instructions to cab drivers.
Do not feed the birds.
posted by Paul McAuley at 2:04 pm
Monday, April 05, 2010
Convention hotel.'I'll show you the life of the mind.'Keep going.Full coverage.Better truth through advertising.Instructions to cab drivers.Do not feed the birds.
About Me
- Name: Paul McAuley
- Location: London, United Kingdom
I'm the author of more than twenty books, including novels, short story collections and a film monograph. My latest novel is Beyond the Burn Line. For reprint, translation and media requests, please contact Oliver Cheetham at the Mic Cheetham Agency.
Previous Posts
- Interview
- On Mars
- Old School Future
- Silo
- A Word From Our Sponsors
- Unimaginableness
- Bangwallop.
- Creativity
- A Random Pattern My iPlayer Just Made
- Mashup
10 Comments:
'I'll show you the life of the mind.'
hahaha
"Please don't feed the birds, this is where they come to die"
That hotel hallway looks like a carpeted prison wing. Life of the mind indeed.
So, Paul, aside from the beautiful setting, how was Eastercon? I'm jealous, stuck as I am in post-industrial North Italy, where videocracy -> idiocracy. I feel I should have planned my hols more carefully.
Hi Pete, will try to do a brief report over the weekend, but don't hold me to it. Have book to write.
Hi Pete--I know you will appreciate this. You are conceptually correct to use an implication sign (material, relevant,....). Idiocracy feeds on much more than TV. I'm not saying this to seem erudite. I am tremendously impressed by what WikiLeaks has accomplished in just one evening. Besides the great reporting job, it has undermined many people's faith in normal politics and most media.
George, you talk about relevance and then say you're not doing it to seem erudite. What if I said you do seem erudite, irrespective of antecedents? Wouldn't you be staring down the abyss of a paradox of (choose system) implication? Heh heh.
Ha Ha! That's precisely the problem. I know all about material implication. But all I know about relevant implications and their logics are the generic name and a few basic ideas. Not one system in detail.
Actually there are paradoxes of relevant implication too, if you use only the intensional operators and paradoxes of strict (ie modal) implication as well. Another reason why we're doomed.
here I plead ignorance.
Post a Comment
<< Home