Though Shakespeare may not have invented parapraxes, he certainly exploited their psychological depths long before Freud.
Some thoughts on the potential evolutionary genesis of intersubjectivity
We has them. I want a cheezburger, and I can has cheezburger, but I don't want to want one.
A book that furnishes no quotations is no book—it is a plaything. Next to the originator of a good sentence is the first quoter of it. How frequently the mere purchase of a book is mistaken for the appropriation of its contents.
Plays have to end, but no one so well as Shakespeare understood how to use them to offer the hospitality of time, the interim of friendship.
There's a way in which everything you see in a poem should be obvious when you see it, should be a duh!-moment.
The New Criterion and the National Association of Scholars are at it again.
Some responses, hastily and inconsiderately set down.
When I was younger, in college and grad school, I'd read that someone my current age had won the lottery, and it just seemed so pointless. What would they do with twenty years of money coming in that could possibly make their, or anyone's, life better?
One modern incarnation of the debate between nominalism and realism is to be found in philosophical arguments about sets. There are two ways of characterizing a set: intensionally, through description (e.g. the set of all inhabitants of London, to use an example of Russell's), and extensionally, which is just a list of the members of the set.