Re: Comparison of philosophical languages
|From:||Bryan Maloney <firstname.lastname@example.org> <slimehoo@...>|
|Date:||Thursday, January 23, 2003, 1:19|
--- In email@example.com, James Landau <Neurotico@A...> wrote:
> In a message dated 1/21/2003 4:05:01 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> andrew@M... writes:
> > James Landau wrote:
> > Raw potatoes are toxic, but cooked ones are safe
> > to eat.
> I sure didn't know that. I knew the potato was in the nightshadefamily, but
> not that IT was one of the toxic ones.
You did not know that because it IS NOT TRUE! I worked in a
laboratory that did a lot of work on potatoes for several years. One
of our studies involved using transgenic potatoes to produce vaccines.
One of our trials required subjects to eat a good deal of raw potato.
It is unpalatable and it sits in your stomach like only raw potato
can, but it is not toxic.
The leaves and stems of the plant, on the other hand, are toxic.
Which, of course, leads to another problem when designing a language
that tries to impart "systematic" correspondence between morphemes and
meaning--blind ignorance of those assigning the morphemes...