Online conversation from today, discussing potentially problematic questions on an exam she’d given:
autographedcat: Bonus question #2: “What do they mean, ‘if a woodchuck could chuck wood’. Is there any point in calling it a woodchuck if it can’t? Defend your answer, quote Sartre if necessary.”
autographedcat: (i have no idea what class you’re teaching right now. I’m just feeling exceptionally silly)
catalana: Logic
catalana: 🙂
autographedcat: Well, there you go, then. The Woodchuck question is completely applicable.
catalana: Sartre believes that existence precedes essence, i.e., that we can create ourselves into whatever we wish to be. Hence he would be perfectly fine with a woodchuck existing even if it couldn’t chuck wood.
catalana: Aren’t you glad you asked? 🙂