@KitFox what? no way. How do you -know- that? (yeah, yeah, you probably actually do know that). are you saying they don't have pain sensors that are just like mammalian ones? or that they don't have -anything- that can possibly be a pain receptor?
@Mitch They don't have anything resembling pain receptors and they also don't produce substance P, which is a typical neurotransmitter for pain signals.
@Noah And the Lord spake unto Noah, and said that the world was divided into seven kingdoms: Hominidae, Animalia, Plantae, Fungi, Protista, Archaea, et Bacteria.
From the top of my head, Danish "de" (practically never used), German "Sie", French "vous", Spanish "usted" are a formal way of addressing someone, especially if one isn't familiar with the addressee. Did English ever have this? It sounds as though Proto-Indo-European might have had this (based o...
I recommend just throwing [sic] in randomly when quoting one's enemies. Nobody will want to admit they don't know why it is there, and the damage is done.
Certain seemingly random combinations of letters can, when pronounced letter by letter, be used to represent words. For example,
XLNC = Excellency
QT = Cutie
IDLE = Ideally
I vaguely recall being informed of a term, possibly ending with -gram, used to describe such "words" and would appreciat...
The age of texting and instant messaging as we all know has created a phenomenon of using shorter versions of words to save on keystrokes. On tiny keypads or phone buttons this obviously can be a time saver. However, in a medium where these shortcuts are not expected (for example, this very Q&...
Yes, the question is open-ended, but I would precise that this unhelpful distinction persist in some exemplar of thoughtful conservatism informed by an acute literary sensibility. However I feel a sense of intellectual kinship when meet people that are able to think on this issue! — Xavier Vidal Hernández28 mins ago
@ΜετάEd OK... those kinds of ... things. Yes, those can be annoying when you find out they ....well, not that they don't work, but that...well, they work for some people.
> In the works of Eco, a predominant concept is the distinction between figure and ground. Thus, any number of desituationisms concerning predialectic deconstruction may be found. Prinn holds that we have to choose between cultural Marxism and subpatriarchialist narrative. — Xavier Vidal Hernández28 mins ago
> If one examines nationalism, one is faced with a choice: either reject structuralist discourse or conclude that government is capable of significance. The subject is interpolated into a textual libertarianism that includes narrativity as a totality. Thus, if structuralist discourse holds, we have to choose between textual libertarianism and subconstructivist theory. — Xavier Vidal Hernández just now
> In a sense, Sartre suggests the use of nationalism to read and modify language. The main theme of the works of Rushdie is a self-fulfilling paradox. Therefore, any number of dematerialisms concerning the paradigm, and some would say the dialectic, of subtextual class exist. Derrida uses the term ‘predialectic deconstruction’ to denote the difference between society and consciousness. — Xavier Vidal Hernández 28 mins ago
Hey @Mr.ShinyandNew安宇 we had some images four ya. Starting here.
> “Society is part of the futility of narrativity,” says Baudrillard; however, according to Pickett, it is not so much society that is part of the futility of narrativity, but rather the failure, and subsequent paradigm, of society. It could be said that the subject is interpolated into a cultural Marxism that includes art as a whole. Many discourses concerning predialectic deconstruction may be revealed. — RegDwight АΑA ♦ just now