I never understood this statement....

[Roger Hicks]

And the opposite is often frequently true: people indignantly claiming statements are meaningless because they don't understand what is being said.

Or aren't willing to try to understand. Or can't accept that an unclear statement may have an elusive nugget of truth in it.

Sure, I've read a lot of meaningless rubbish in my life. But a lot of it has been from people who are all too willing to dismiss something as meaningless rubbish because they're too stupid or too lazy to think.

After you've thought hard, there are three possibilities.

The first is that you're too stupid to understand it. Rare, but not unknown.

The second is that it's a badly expressed idea that requires a good deal of thought to yield up an interesting conclusion.

The third possibility is that what you've read really is meaningless rubbish. This happens quite a lot.

Cheers,

R.

 

[kxl]

The Polaoid process is clearly NOT a dichotomy--poor choice of words.

A closer metaphor can be found in quantum mechanics in Schrodinger's famous thought experiment, i.e., "When does a quantum system stop existing as a superposition of states and become one or the other?"

 

[David Hughes]

Hi,

A lot of the problem is caused by misuse of words; like obsolete, mint, macro and so on. And the internet spreads it, sellers encourage it and the result is a dreadful muddle.

Add spelling checkers to the problem and it gets worse...

Regards, David

 

[nongfuspring]

After you've thought hard, there are three possibilities.

The first is that you're too stupid to understand it. Rare, but not unknown.

The second is that it's a badly expressed idea that requires a good deal of thought to yield up an interesting conclusion.

The third possibility is that what you've read really is meaningless rubbish. This happens quite a lot.

Cheers,

R.

Well said, though to add a fourth possibility sometimes texts can be both well written and difficult to understand because of their subject matter. Phenomenology, linguistics, cultural theory, maths etc. can often be really hard to understand because the subject matter can be so at odds with ordinary experience.

That said, I think we can probably all agree that the OP's sentence is just plain bad writing.

 

[Shirley Creazzo]

I am only struck by how much PhotoSpeak and ArtSpeak resemble GallerySpeak in which people unfamiliar with the artist or his intent expound endlessly on his creation. I watched a gallery interview with an artist on public broadcasting a few years back. Warmed my heart when after the gallery person went on - and on - about the muses that moved the artist and the spiritual intent in his piece, the artist himself said "and the best part is it looks good upside-down too!"
Love that guy.

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . though to add a fourth possibility sometimes texts can be both well written and difficult to understand because of their subject matter. Phenomenology, linguistics, cultural theory, maths etc. can often be really hard to understand because the subject matter can be so at odds with ordinary experience.

That said, I think we can probably all agree that the OP's sentence is just plain bad writing.

All indisputable.

Cheers,

R.

 

[jvo]

seems like without the context, the statement leaves a bit to be desired in terms of clarity.

jvoi