|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have a thought.... [This message has been edited by Ron Pulliam (edited 01 July 2001).]
|
|
|
|
|
Don't be afraid Ron, share it with us! http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/smile.gif">
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jul 1, 2001 - 7:39 AM
|
|
|
By: |
Beatty
(Member)
|
God knows I didn't count the o's "in Nooo! Oh God, noooooooo!"------------------ http://www.geocities.com/kyle_beatty" TARGET=_blank>Utterly indulgent and ultimately pointless test bed of a web site.
|
|
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Beatty: God knows I didn't count the o's "in Nooo! Oh God, noooooooo!"
No? NP: Edward Elgar: Enigma Variations (LSO, Sir Adrian Boult)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I insist on thinking 37 and a 5/8ths times before beginning a new thread.
|
|
|
|
|
No problem, as long as you remember to count your thoughts before posting.NP: Leonard Bernstein: Symphonic Suite "On the Waterfront" (Israel Philharmonic Orchestra, Leonard Bernstein)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Beatty: No!
Nooo! Oh God, noooooooo!
|
|
|
|
|
Hey, Marian, this was about thinking before starting a new thread. We aren't required to think before posting, too. Imagine what would happen then...
|
|
|
|
|
You're sure? I don't think so. At least, I wouldn't count on it.
|
|
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Marian Schedenig: You're sure? ]
Of course I'm sure quote: I don't think so.
See? There you go. quote: At least, I wouldn't count on it.
Does not counting on something count as something, and if so, does it count as a single thought, or does the specific thought process required to not count on something automatically count as two, since you have to think about something (one thought) and then decide that you won't count on it (second thought)? [This message has been edited by Nicolai P. Zwar (edited 03 July 2001).]
|
|
|
|
|
Good question. As a first step to solving the problem, I would suggest to introduce a unit to measure the amount of thoughts. We should introduce the unit "cogit" (short "cgt") for a basic thought, i.e. a thought that cannot be divided into sub-thoughts.If you have a line of thoughts, you can calculate the total cogit number by taking each separate thought, dividing it into smaller thoughts as long as possible, and then counting those elementary thoughts. I do believe that, even though the cogit index of calculating the cogit index of a line of thought may actually exceed the cogit index of the original line of thought in many cases, this will still provide us with a means for making more specific declarations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But this thread is about general thought research, not anyone's own thoughts in particular. That would make the whole thread go into a counter-direction.NP: William Walton: As You Like It - Suite (LPO, Carl Davis)
|
|
|
|
|
OH! Like you NEVER, EVER sent a thread off in a counter direction ever before in your WHOLE LIFE, Mr. "I Went To London To See Jerry Goldsmith" Pally-Pal!!! http://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/biggrin.gif">
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but I always think three, four or five times before I do that!NP: William Walton: "Spitefire" PRelude and Fugue (Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra, Sir Charles Groves)
|
|
|
|
|
I think I get this now, yes I do. Really. I just have one question: is it worse having countless thoughts (think of all the superfluous threads THAT would generate!), or doing thoughtless counts? Seems you could lose your count while counting thoughtlessly, or even lose the thread (so to speak) of why you were counting to begin with. Why were we counting, again?
|
|
|
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dana Wilcox: Seems you could lose your count while counting thoughtlessly, or even lose the thread (so to speak) of why you were counting to begin with.
Ah, Dana, you have found what many consider to be the greatest threat to our modern civilization. This problem has been known for a long time to certain people, but was never made public, for fear of mass panics. Please keep your information confident, and consider joining the "Association Agains Thoughtless Counting" (AATC) to help to find the solution to this truly grave matter. NP: Edward Elgar: Pomp and Circumstance (LPO, Sir Adrian Boult)
|
|
|
|
|
I once belonged to the "Association Against Thoughtless Associations", does that count? I have since foresworn thoughtless associations, but was once told by a professional friend that I have loose associations. Better than loose stools, I guess. NP: Don Ho, "Tiny Bubbles" (3rd Movement) [This message has been edited by Dana Wilcox (edited 03 July 2001).]
|
|
|
|
|
"I once belonged to the 'Association Against Thoughtless Associations', does that count?"If your Official Membership Card is dated anytime after December 31, 1999... IT COUNTS! NP: "Tiptoe Through The Tulips" TINY TIM (adagio motto voce)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|