All cats die. Socrates is dead. Therefore Socrates is a cat.
Eugene Ionesco, Rhinoceros
Umm no. So far we\’ve proved that Socrates was a cat, not that he is……
All cats die. Socrates is dead. Therefore Socrates is a cat.
Eugene Ionesco, Rhinoceros
Umm no. So far we\’ve proved that Socrates was a cat, not that he is……
If socrates is a cat (Already proven) . And he also has died. And cat corpses stay as cat corpses. Then Socrates is still a cat ( deceased)
????
Which bounces higher?
S(ocrates)T(ab)B(y).
But do cat corpses remain cats?
Surely they are rotting flesh and hence no longer cats. They are worm food.
I am more interested in how Ionescu can be a rhinoceros. I assume that one begins “Rhinos talk crap…..”
Who quoted this? It’s simply invalid — it has the logical form:
All A’s are B’s.
C is a B.
Therefore C is an A.
It doesn’t prove that Socrates was a cat, or any such nonsense.
Fallacy of the undistributed middle in syllogistic logic.
Errm, BB and paul ilc, you’re rather missing the point: Eugène Ionesco was an absurdist playwright. Ergo pointing out that his logic is absurd is rather akin to remarking on a Dick Francis novel having something to do with horses.