<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 2015-12-03 20:12, Michael Butler wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPevRZeLYawopD3GES3WPb6vF6wJ5yJyP=s07ZiKVWxtAJeJtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<p><br>
On Dec 3, 2015 3:18 AM, "Anders Sandberg" <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:anders@aleph.se"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:anders@aleph.se">anders@aleph.se</a></a>>
wrote:</p>
<p>> Can you fail at destiny?</p>
<p>Succinct and probing question, Anders. May I quote with
attribution? It's a fairly straightforward antinomy, but I know
a few Slavs, at least, who might get a kick out of it.</p>
</blockquote>
Sure! It does have a Slav ring to it. It is a bit like the Swedish
semi-joke expression: "It is never too late to give up."<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAPevRZeLYawopD3GES3WPb6vF6wJ5yJyP=s07ZiKVWxtAJeJtQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>> Yes, philosophers are annoying :-)</p>
<p>Nah, just "differently-pleasing". :)<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<br>
That is also quotable. Or quote-apt, as a philosopher would say. <br>
<br>
(Then we get to a big debate in metaquotation theory about whether
being quote-apt is an intrinsic property of a proposition, or a
disposition, or just our folk-theory of the complex relationship
between quoter and quotation.)<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Anders Sandberg
Future of Humanity Institute
Oxford Martin School
Oxford University</pre>
</body>
</html>