December 02, 2005

The Blogological Proof; Or, the Ultimate Expression of Blog Triumphalism

At Thanksgiving, we were discussing kinds of blogs one might have, and my brother said, "If something has been done, it surely has been blogged."

This led me to produce the following proof:

(1) If something has been done, it has been blogged. [apodictic]
(2) If not-blogging has been done, it has been blogged. [Instantiation of (1), which has universal form]
(3) If not-blogging has been done, there is blogging of not-blogging. [Rewriting of (2)]
(4) Blogging of not-blogging is a contradiction in terms. [Properties of negation--if you are blogging, you are not not-blogging]
(5) Therefore not-blogging has not been done. [(3), (4) modus tollens]
(6) Therefore all activities are blogging.

So we can all stop pretending to have real lives now. Hooray!

Posted by Matt Weiner at December 2, 2005 08:32 AM

i seem to recall you blogging about not-blogging at some point. furthermore, i do not have a real life. (unless talking to cats counts.)

Posted by: corey at December 2, 2005 08:43 AM

Can I use this as an example in class how confusing use and mention can get you into trouble?

Posted by: Richard Zach at December 2, 2005 11:01 AM

Sure. I think it might be interesting to point out exactly where the fallacy is. Or do I mean how many fallacies there are?

Posted by: Matt Weiner at December 2, 2005 02:11 PM

Haven't we all blogged about not-blogging at some point?

Posted by: bitchphd at December 2, 2005 10:05 PM

Well, that's one of the fallacies. I thought of turning it into a blogito, as in Descartes' argument that I cannot doubt that I doubt, because the very doubt undermines itself. Maybe that will work. I cannot blog that I do not blog, because in doing so I in fact blog. So blogging is my essential nature.

Posted by: Matt Weiner at December 2, 2005 11:29 PM

This comment marks the place of a not comment I made earlier.

Posted by: eb at December 3, 2005 02:36 AM