Pie chart

Proof that some truths are quantifiable.


  1. Dang it John, you’ve reintroduced confusing quality to my nice simple world. I mean, I like pumpkin but not meringue; rhubarb when it’s tart but not with vanilla; cherry especially when there’s whipped cream; look what you’ve done to me!

  2. Questions as to this quantification remain.

    1). Which part is pie you have cut, and which pie you will have cut?
    2). Which part of the pie have you shared?
    3). It seems that you can have your pie and eat it too, is this possible?
    4). There appears a crumb remainder, does this fall into pie you have eaten or pie you will have eaten?
    5). Did any of this pie stick to the knife?
    6). The pie seems to be telling us that it is 4:00, is that the time you ate “pie you have eaten”? Does this mean that when you have finished the pie it will be midnight?
    7). If we divide the entire pie quantification (“pie I have eaten” plus “pie I have yet eaten”) by r-squared, will we end up with pie again?
    8). Where are the 4 and 20 blackbirds?

  3. Ontologically I find the crumb remainder especially puzzling. I can get pie-I’ve-eaten and pie-not-yet-eaten to create an internal distinction within pie-I-have so that I can both have and eat pie. But the crumbs, the crumbs, what about the crumbs?

  4. isn’t the not-Pacman also necessary as a boundary condition for the Pacman?

    Dammit – further ontological confusion. The lesson, surely, is a Hegelian one: Pacman as the unity of Pacman and not-Pacman.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s