Talk:917: Hofstadter - Revision history

Kev at 17:37, 13 May 2022

2022-05-13T17:37:01Z

172.70.178.225 at 16:44, 24 January 2022

2022-01-24T16:44:57Z

172.69.35.239 at 22:07, 6 July 2021

2021-07-06T22:07:49Z

172.69.35.239 at 22:06, 6 July 2021

2021-07-06T22:06:17Z

Ardaglash at 19:02, 29 September 2020

2020-09-29T19:02:55Z

Koro Neil at 01:44, 28 December 2018

2018-12-28T01:44:11Z

Koro Neil at 01:43, 28 December 2018

2018-12-28T01:43:50Z

141.101.104.221 at 20:25, 15 January 2017

2017-01-15T20:25:28Z

Davidy22 at 19:43, 3 March 2016

2016-03-03T19:43:19Z

Antinomiste at 19:31, 3 March 2016

2016-03-03T19:31:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:37, 13 May 2022
Line 21:		Line 21:

	For Sale: Hofstadter's Old Baby Shoes		For Sale: Hofstadter's Old Baby Shoes
		+	:Shoes that wore Hofstadter. [[User:Kev\|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev\|talk]]) 17:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 Should it read “I'm so meta, even this acrostic”? Or did Randall eschew correctness in favor of more readers knowing what the comic's words meant? [[User:YatharthROCK|YatharthROCK]] ([[User talk:YatharthROCK|talk]]) 22:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
-The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
+The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the () Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221|141.101.104.221]]
@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 So what were to happen if Hofstadter observed himself in his autobiography?  [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1|127.0.0.1]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:07, 6 July 2021
Line 18:		Line 18:
	This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)		This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

−	So what were to happen if Hofstadter observed himself in his autobiography? [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1\|127.0.0.0]]	+	So what were to happen if Hofstadter observed himself in his autobiography? [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1\|127.0.0.1]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:06, 6 July 2021
Line 17:		Line 17:

	This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)		This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
		+
		+	So what were to happen if Hofstadter observed himself in his autobiography? [[Special:Contributions/127.0.0.1\|127.0.0.0]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:02, 29 September 2020
Line 4:		Line 4:

	Is it worth mentioning that Is Meta is an acronym for "I'm," the first word of the acronym? That seems like it would be in the spirit of Hofstadter and "meta," especially since Hofstadter talks a lot about the meaning of "I" in his books. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.117\|108.162.237.117]] 04:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)		Is it worth mentioning that Is Meta is an acronym for "I'm," the first word of the acronym? That seems like it would be in the spirit of Hofstadter and "meta," especially since Hofstadter talks a lot about the meaning of "I" in his books. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.117\|108.162.237.117]] 04:28, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
		+	:I would think so. I came here to see about making that edit, including noting that the final "I'm" is both "I AM" (the ultimate autobio!) and also provides self-reference back to the start of the original phrase. [[User:Ardaglash\|Ardaglash]] ([[User talk:Ardaglash\|talk]]) 19:02, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

	Would "this acronym" imply that the sentence itself is an acronym for something much larger? A biography, perhaps? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.218\|108.162.237.218]] 14:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)		Would "this acronym" imply that the sentence itself is an acronym for something much larger? A biography, perhaps? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.218\|108.162.237.218]] 14:48, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:44, 28 December 2018
Line 15:		Line 15:
	The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221\|141.101.104.221]]		The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221\|141.101.104.221]]

−	This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:43, 28 December 2018 (UTC)	+	This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:44, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:43, 28 December 2018
Line 14:		Line 14:

	The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221\|141.101.104.221]]		The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221\|141.101.104.221]]
		+
		+	This is even cleverer than I think it is. [[User:Koro Neil\|Koro Neil]] ([[User talk:Koro Neil\|talk]]) 01:43, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:25, 15 January 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:

	The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste\|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste\|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)		The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste\|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste\|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	The last panel's boustrophedon acronym. "Woah I Think He / Nailed It" is an acronym for "Within", if you read in boustrophedon. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.221\|141.101.104.221]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 3 March 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste\|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste\|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
−
	I bet Randall felt so clever when he came up with that acronym. '''[[User:Davidy22\|<u>{{Color\|#707\|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22\|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)		I bet Randall felt so clever when he came up with that acronym. '''[[User:Davidy22\|<u>{{Color\|#707\|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22\|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Line 12:		Line 10:

	Should it read “I'm so meta, even this acrostic”? Or did Randall eschew correctness in favor of more readers knowing what the comic's words meant? [[User:YatharthROCK\|YatharthROCK]] ([[User talk:YatharthROCK\|talk]]) 22:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)		Should it read “I'm so meta, even this acrostic”? Or did Randall eschew correctness in favor of more readers knowing what the comic's words meant? [[User:YatharthROCK\|YatharthROCK]] ([[User talk:YatharthROCK\|talk]]) 22:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste\|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste\|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:31, 3 March 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	The explanation is factually incorrect... the prefix "meta" comes from the (ancient) Greek preposition "meta" which doesn't mean "beyond" or "out of" but merely "after". It came to mean, as a prefix, "beyond" or "reflexive", in modern european languages, via the latin neologism "metaphysica", supposed to be a translitteration of the title of Aristotle's collection of essays. This mysterious title was given by their first editor, living centuries after Aristotle, and was "ta meta ta physica", that is to say something like : "those [the books] after those regarding nature". As those mysteriously titled books concerned the general principles of reality, (including famously the "god", the divine principle of nature"), the title came wrongly to be understood as meaning "beyond nature". Eventually, the "metaphysics" of something came to be understood as dealing with the principles "beyond" a given domain, hence "meta-studies" or "meta-psychology", etc. It is, however, a mistake made since centuries... --[[User:Antinomiste\|Antinomiste]] ([[User talk:Antinomiste\|talk]]) 19:31, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
		+
	I bet Randall felt so clever when he came up with that acronym. '''[[User:Davidy22\|<u>{{Color\|#707\|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22\|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)		I bet Randall felt so clever when he came up with that acronym. '''[[User:Davidy22\|<u>{{Color\|#707\|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22\|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 17 April 2013 (UTC)