Re: virus: Re:PCR Three Axioms

D.H.Rosdeitcher (
Tue, 30 Sep 1997 00:19:52 -0400

Eva wrote:
>Looks like we're in need of some clarification about what is and is not a
>statement. Questions, commands, and interjections (such as "Great
>Scott!") are not statements; that's why we have other terms for them.
>There are nonsense strings which are not statements (such as both the
>examples quoted above, one of which uses English words but not in a
>coherent fashion), and there are also nonsense statements, utterances
>which are grammatical but fail to make any sense and are thus
>non-falsifiable (such as Noam Chomsky's classic example "Colorless green
>ideas sleep furiously").

What is Chomsky's statement called? It doesn't seem like it's falsifiable,
axiomatic or tautological. (That would falsify Brett's statement that
"statements are either falsifiable, axiomatic or tautological".).

> And there are statements which do hold meaning,
>yet are non-falsifiable, such as "That's a really good movie"; statements
>of opinion are dependent on internal standards, and thus can't be
>coherently argued with without establishing some common bases for
>judgement ("But you said the star sucked!").

What do you call an ambiguous statement like that? It too, does not seem
to fall into any of the 3 categories mentioned.

Is the statement, "Tautologies are useless but falsifiable statements are
useful" tautological or falsifiable?

--David R.