The philosophy papers blog is up. Two new papers, including one arguing that something like this blog, indeed physically indistinguishable from it, will be written no matter what I do. This is very hard to imagine, especially if I start running off random words. Agate hemming. Agreement ghee thy. Laurate whims. Bed loll mom poor A erewhiles hitter ninth A sandblaster goff swoons. I think I might stop before this game starts getting childish.

I was trying to set up the section of the Greenough paper on the seductiveness of Sorites arguments, and it was very tempting to compare the Sorites argument to Gerty MacDowell, but two things intervened. First, I realised that everyone who got the reference would be offended by it. Secondly, and perhaps this wasn’t coincidental, I couldn’t find a way of filling out the reference that I didn’t find somewhat offensive. The analogy looks good at first, the Sorites as initially attractive but flawed on further inspection, but ultimately I think it won’t run. It would be nice to have some kind of analogy for the Sorites. This shouldn’t be too hard. It’s not like literature isn’t full of examples of the initially attractive but ultimately flawed. Even without leaving Ulysses there are the Sirens, but they seem too obvious to use. Alternatively, I could just try and make sure the philosophy is plausible and leave the analogies for the more talented.