« do you want trousers with your mouth? | Main | the language of colour »
Photo: Nathaniel Brooks/NYT
An excellent NYT piece on Governor Paterson's "complicated relationship with the truth" contains this priceless extract:
When investigators asked Mr. Paterson whether he considered the statement accurate or inaccurate, he replied, “I would say it was neither.”
He did not clarify what something is, if it is neither accurate nor inaccurate.
I imagine it's liked being governed by Jacques Derrida.
(h/t Ben Smith)
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00e5500eaa9788340133f3605f11970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference governing philosophy:
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Perhaps Gov. Paterson has just repealed the Law of the Excluded Middle:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_excluded_middle
Posted by: peter | August 28, 2010 at 04:17 PM
something can be partly accurate?
Posted by: ashcash | August 30, 2010 at 09:30 PM
Yes.
Posted by: Ian Leslie | August 30, 2010 at 10:17 PM