Logic's a bitch

The whole weekend I was in TAM. It was an interesting experience and I'll write more about it, but I want to tackle another subject. Last night I met someone there (well, actually in the after drinking) who told me an anecdote on logic. Logic is difficult. Not the algebraic formalism. That part, even though it is always the part which is taught at school at University again and again, is the easy part. The difficulty in logic is mapping the concepts that we are trying to express and interpret the results. Which is never given so much time. Natural language is particularly ill suited for expressing logical concepts. That is why we use logic in the first place.

Because of this gap between what we are thinking and what we can express in a formal language it is easy to fall into fallacies of different kinds. In this mapping there is denotation v.s. connotation, context dependency and all sorts of irregularities in the way natural languages work. And this if we have the problem stated in natural language which may actually be our goal.

Well, the anecdote. Apparently when he was in Mexico there were this guys giving out cards with prostitutes photos and phones. One of them had written on it: "If I am not her, I leave"

by the photo. I may not remember what he said right (I was a tad drunk at the moment). He then made some comment about symbolic logic and told us how he got all the cards. The real question is: Is the statement logically wrong?. If the statement is what I remember, then the discussion is void, but if it is, I think it is right.

In the sentence "I" denotes the real prostitute who actually wrote the ad and who goes to the place. "Her", means the photo of the woman printed in the card. If both are not the same, then the woman going to the house which is I, would leave.

If the statement was "If I am not her, she leaves", would actually have a contradiction embedded, because she is not there as the whole context of the card points to the "real" woman being the one in the first person. From the context, the woman of the photo may not even exist as a real person.

In any case, this simple statement is quite complex to analyze.

Logic is difficult.

viajando

En estos días me encuentro más y más en el limbo
del viaje. En el atemporal zumbido de la cabina de un avión. En la luz interior de un autobús deslizándose vertiginoso en la noche. Esperando llegar. Disfrutando la paz de no estar en ningún lugar en ningún momento. Congelado en el ámbar de la memoria, expectante. Viajando.

back on my iphone

I am back with a vengeance. I stopped writing here. A mix of getting bored, not having time and not liking the exposure even if nobody reads it. Now i can write from anywhere... We'll see. I wanted to write about motivation and enthusiasm. As a teacher it is probably the single most important thing to convey and have. I am taking knowledge for granted, we'll leave that one for another day. I started reading one of my favorite authors books today. It got me thinking. Is it that good or is it just me being over eager?. Does the same teacher appear as a petulant arrogant bastard and a revealing master depending on the welcome of the student?. How is this achieved?...

necrophilia and puritanism

I was watching CSI NY today and noticed (again) an interesting pattern in U.S. t.v. series for "adults". It is amazing. They may show you any kind of violence, contents of open human stomachs, autopsies, sex and philias, but not a naked body. Showing a naked body would be a sin. Showing a semi-descomposed body seems to be ok though, even if it is naked, because it has no discernable sexual organs. Not that I complain, I mean, it is CSI, dead bodies are part of the scenery, but I hate the strangely schewed puritanism. Why is a nipple worse than the inside of the ribcage?.

Bloody puritanism, in this case, very bloody.

me pregunto

Si había algo ahí. O al final, debajo de los adoquines, solo había alcantarillas.
Si detrás de los ojos abiertos de ilusión, sólo había ilusiones. Me pregunto
si las revoluciones sólo trajeron sangre y lágrimas.

Espero que no.

about friendship

I have always been of independent character. That doesn't mean I do not depend on others. Only that when I do, I try not to impose on them. Except probably my couple, but I do not want to go into that possible flaw of my character now.

What does this mean?. I think friendship is something given freely.
Like open arms or a hug.

I have (and have had) some friends who have told me I was not there for them. But they didn't say that something was happening. I was supposed to poll them at all times to ask them if they were ok. Except I had my own problems. And I would have been there for them at no time. But they have to call me.

I travel for long times and get isolated for one reason or another. If you want me to reach you, you have to ask. I do not give more than I ask for. I will not reproach a friend for not contacting me while I was in a bad shape.
When I need help, I shout.

Y así.

Voy a escribir en un blog aunque me arrepienta :-). No sé muy bien de qué voy a escribir. Seguramente de un poco de todo. Algunas cosas personales y otras no.
Simplemente quiero probar este medio de comunicación y de paso hacer un mini ejercicio de narcisismo online... Ya veremos. De momento, algo de "poesía":

Dile a la noche que deje de gritar tu nombre
Como ecos en los ojos de otras chicas
Tu ausencia como tibiedad en mi lecho
Como un vacío que le priva de brillo a la mañana.

No dije que fuese a ser alegre, ni buena!!!.