Correction?

By -
"Après le déluge, c’est moi." Isn't that supposed to be in Italian??

Comments

  1. gcallah1:02 AM

    Yes, it is. Corrected.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Gian Piero de Bellis5:31 AM

    French: "Après moi, le déluge"; Italian: "Dopo di me, il diluvio". That means, in other words: after I have gone everything can collapse but I don't give a damn. I won't be there. It will be the task of future generations to put things right.

    ReplyDelete
  3. gcallah6:13 AM

    Grazie.

    ReplyDelete
  4. gcallah6:54 AM

    Oh, but wait, it now says the opposite of what I meant to say! I was making a joke: it had just flooded at my house, and afterwards all that was left was me. Ah, chuck it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Gian Piero de Bellis9:17 AM

    Gene, sometimes people don't mean what they say and don't say what they mean. All the best for your house.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wabulon4:12 PM

    O Irresponsible One: When was the last time (if in fact time so long ago is expressible) that you blubbered to God, pleading with Him to spare your house? See? I tole ya so!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more