A clarification
A reasonably commodious vicus of link-clicking has brought me to Kieran Setiya's blog, which at one point quotes Steven Wright: But as Steven Wright remarked, you can't have everything – where would you put it?
. The comment is, of course, founded on a confusion—you could leave it where it was.
Comments
on 2007-06-05 22:18:29.0, rone commented:
If you left it where it was, then you wouldn't have it anymore. That's logic!
and, further, on 2007-06-05 22:22:38.0, ben wolfson commented:
No, if it were so, then it would be, but as it isn't, it ain't—that's logic.
You only need to put something you've acquired somewhere if you haven't also acquired the place it currently occupies. If you buy a house you don't need to move the house to some place you already own.
and, further, on 2007-06-06 6:29:45.0, ogged commented:
You know what's wrong with your logic? Al Qaeda.
and, further, on 2007-06-06 13:46:07.0, ben wolfson commented:
Whatever, Lur.
and, further, on 2007-06-06 15:19:31.0, bitchphd commented:
Ah, but in that case, y'see, you're buying not only the house but the land it stands on.
and, further, on 2007-06-06 18:55:09.0, ben wolfson commented:
So what are you saying—that you have to move the land too?
and, further, on 2007-06-06 22:48:32.0, bitchphd commented:
You got me there.