Ah, cleaning up some folders on the laptop. Apparently last December, this cracked me up. Heh… kinda still does. 😉
Google+: View post on Google+
Post imported by Google+Blog. Created By Daniel Treadwell.
Categories
Archives
Links
Random Quote
“No one can tell what goes on in between the person you were and the person you become. No one can chart that blue and lonely section of hell. There are no maps of the change. You just...come out the other side. Or don't.”
by Stephen King The Stand
For a gd reason. Shit is nutz.
No, because toast is not a collective noun.
No, because Toast is still an inanimate object, while people are not.
Oh +Stiofán Ó Broin, ever the serious grammatical lad! Nice call, though.
+Eric Hansen I know too many people who are less animate than toast. I invalidate your argument. 😉
Thank you for the recognition.
LOL
Haha! Cute – I laughed – but inaccurate. If you have a bot that reads your mind to know when you want toast, gets the bread, and toasts it for you, I'd like to hear about it. Even then, it's still dependent on you for making toast.
I am finding that my stream is full of literate, yet still able to be amused, peeps. I am pleased.
+Anna Bobana you are so
Cinnamon toast.
+Cliff Bramlett unless it is toasting toast without you wanting to toast toast, then does the toast toast itself? If you wanted the toast to toast itself then yes, you would be toasting toast, but the raptor was not talking about you (or any other relative being) wanting to toast toast, therefore (grammar aside) the toast would be toasting toast which is actually wrong also, considering that you dont toast toast, you toast bread then it becomes toasted toast… Or is it toasted bread? Is toast ever actually toast?
"Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_buffalo_Buffalo_buffalo
WOOO!
+Amanda Rachelle Warren thanks… now my brain is broken
I thought perhaps this might work like Candyman Candyman Candyman but, as yet, nothing has happened in relation to my mirror or immediate environs.
Also "As as as as as."
Should be "toast toasts toast".
You guys were having so much fun, I just wanted to play.
+Bryan Hecht Hmm, you raise a good point. If the toast is not actually toast, can a Toaster be said to toast toast at all? Perhaps in the Raptor's dimension, but from my experience a toaster still toasts toast. Yet still, if we posit that bread subjected to the act of toasting is in deed toast, then also positing that the toaster isn't toasting toast to treat itself and that toast isn't cannibalistic in nature there remains the issue of why a toaster is toasting toast if toast exists as a tasty treat for the toast aficionado yet there is no taster to test the toast. I'll have to ponder the productivity of pursuing this progressively problematic philosophy we're pontificating, provided it hasn't proved too ponderous.
Technically, toasters don't toast toast, they toast bread. Technically.
+Cliff Bramlett, your post is positively perfect. I toast you, good sir!
Ok. I've watched this post unfold in a sort of Socratic silence and feel that now is the time to intervene.
Toasters do indeed toast bread but they could also be used to FURTHER toast a piece of already toasted bread and therefore could be used to toast toast.
I propose the following corrections to the opening statement:
Does that mean that toasters don't toast toast, slices of toast, through some miraculous gaining of sentience, further toast already toasted slices of bread.
The answer being; no.
I suppose toast could toast toast, but if it is already toasted then at what point does a thing become more itself? Isn't it already the Socratic form? Toast is toast, regardless of the level of toastedness.
+Amanda Rachelle Warren No, the Socratic form would require the knowledge that all we know about toast is that we know nothing about toast.
Something hot can be heated, something cold can be cooled, toast can be toast through many different stages after the bread state. Given that we start with a lightly toasted piece of toast, the process can be continued further, by grades, until the toast has entered the inedible carbon stage but this is off topic and not central to the concept of whether toast can gain sentience and further toast slices of already toasted toast.
Speaking of sentient toast…am I the only one who remembers Powdered Toast Man?
Powder Toast man
Bagels bagels bagels… With cream cheese.
I remember powdered toast man. I watched an evening of Ren and stimpy on LSD when I was 17. Unforgettable.
How can a bagel bagel a bagle? Nonsense, tasty, tasty nonsense. Now I want a bagel.
"Suppose further," Socrates says, "that the toast was compelled to look at the fire: wouldn't it be struck golden and try to turn its gaze back towards the pantry, as toward what he can see clearly and hold to be real? What if someone forcibly dragged such a toast upward, out of the toaster: wouldn't the toast be angry at the one doing this to him? And if dragged all the way out into the sunlight, wouldn't it be distressed and unable to see "even one of the things now said to be toasted," viz. the tastiness of its surface?"
Or as Shakespeare said (in perfect iambic pentameter):
Oh, bread, grow thou not stale in bag. Toast on!
The personal sentiments of the toast are not central to the original statement and these reflections seem to be mere asides. You remind me of Protagoras.
Like "Man is the measure of all things?" Nah. That's way too speciesist. Protagoras wouldn't care about the toast at all…just man's relation to /perception of the toast. Or I could be wrong. I'm drunk and I'm better at symbolic logic than philosophy. 🙁
Toast shmoast. I've got warm freshly made banana bread and muffins downstairs. Frank Zappa anyone? 😉
Shit I'm toasted.
Banana bread and +Amanda Rachelle Warren . Can you go wrong with that? Somehow I knew she was married! SOB!. Not crying!
+Pam Beardsley ptm…smh. I love ren and stimpy. Happy happy. Joy joy.