voidbat:

winneganfake:

yudkowsky:

Consider the claim, “There are no leafy greens that are good in salads.” We can refute this claim by presenting arugula.

Consider the class of claims that cannot be refuted by presenting arugula. We will term these claims unarugulable.

Consider the term “unarguably”. It may initially seem like this term is empty of meaning, since we can argue with just about anything, e.g., “Well, I say the Sun *did* crash into the Earth yesterday.” But what about arugula? You can’t argue with arugula. It’s just a plant. Thus, arugula is unarguable.

We can furthermore demonstrate the above fact by presenting arugula – “See? It’s right here! You can’t argue against it, it’s not a claim!” Thus arugula is arugulably unarguable.

If the claim that something is arugulable is itself arugulable, then, following the terminological rule for designating similar philosophical concepts such as superdupervenience, we shall say it is arugulabugulable. Conversely, everything not in this class is unarugulabugulable.

Now say THAT three times fast. Out loud. Make sure to record it for the rest of us. 

i hate arugula.