I shall attempt to answer the question "Without the birth of this Bloch, how could the birth of this blog have ever come about?"
I answer that the blog could never have come about. The birth of Peter Bloch is an INUS condition for the existence of this blog, where an INUS condition is understood as an Insufficient but Necessary part of a condition Unnecessary but Sufficient for the result. As the left side of the page reminds us, the formal cause of this blog is Fishman Blog-ness. The efficient cause is Peter Bloch's mind. Although I am if Peter Bloch's mind is the immediate efficient cause, certainly his mind is somewhere in a series of causes. The birth of Peter Bloch is a cause of this mind, so long as we do not consider the fact that his mind existed since his conception. Of course, had Peter Bloch not been born, his mind would have not have remained incarnate and thus Peter Bloch's mind would have been unable to produce this blog.
Well,perhaps the observance of rhetoric has been overlooked. Sometimes it is useful to use questions as a rhetorical device in order that one may be forced to ponder the circumstance more deeply. This is usually a question that doesn't actually need to be answered out-right, but the "answer" to the rhetorical question lies in the pathos that it provokes in the listener/reader. In this case, such a rhetorical question should invite all readers of this blog to take part in a feeling of appreciation, celebration, and gratitude (don't you know I'm all about FEELINGS!). The question points to the origin of the blog itself and makes one consider something they may not have considered before. I don't really know anything about rhetoric, thus my lack of it here, but... I'm just sayin'
6 comments:
Sticks
I shall attempt to answer the question "Without the birth of this Bloch, how could the birth of this blog have ever come about?"
I answer that the blog could never have come about. The birth of Peter Bloch is an INUS condition for the existence of this blog, where an INUS condition is understood as an Insufficient but Necessary part of a condition Unnecessary but Sufficient for the result. As the left side of the page reminds us, the formal cause of this blog is Fishman Blog-ness. The efficient cause is Peter Bloch's mind. Although I am if Peter Bloch's mind is the immediate efficient cause, certainly his mind is somewhere in a series of causes. The birth of Peter Bloch is a cause of this mind, so long as we do not consider the fact that his mind existed since his conception. Of course, had Peter Bloch not been born, his mind would have not have remained incarnate and thus Peter Bloch's mind would have been unable to produce this blog.
Q.E.D. (Sticks)
I hope this clears up any confusion.
Well,perhaps the observance of rhetoric has been overlooked. Sometimes it is useful to use questions as a rhetorical device in order that one may be forced to ponder the circumstance more deeply. This is usually a question that doesn't actually need to be answered out-right, but the "answer" to the rhetorical question lies in the pathos that it provokes in the listener/reader. In this case, such a rhetorical question should invite all readers of this blog to take part in a feeling of appreciation, celebration, and gratitude (don't you know I'm all about FEELINGS!). The question points to the origin of the blog itself and makes one consider something they may not have considered before.
I don't really know anything about rhetoric, thus my lack of it here, but... I'm just sayin'
I'm on a boat!
I, also, am on a boat.
In nave sum et... id cito it et... Habeo themam nauticam pashminam afghanam.
Sicut potestis videre, ego quoque in nave sum.
Post a Comment