I’d be curious if certain syntaxes are easier than others.
106 karma · joined April 8, 2016
I’d be curious if certain syntaxes are easier than others.
Since the theology of the authorship of the Bible specifically posits that it was written by people, then that would also explain why it does not address things that the writers did not know.
Lastly, many of the writings of the Christian Bible (somewhat similarly for the Jewish Bible) were written for a particular occasion (this is even more true in the New Testament epistles and gospels). Thus, the message of those writings needed to have a purpose and the implied audience (as opposed to the empirical audience [see implied/empirical authorship/audience theory]) is the intended audience for the author. All this to say, that is why it's challenging to find truths that we can agree on when reading an ancient text, for ancient cultures, by ancient authors, and find application in a 21st-century world. It's not impossible, but that is the challenge of exegesis.
Trying to do presentations on a Nix machine is a nightmare.
Edit: and it is http://www.whispersystems.org/blog/facebook-messenger
The code (of course) isn't public, it's just that the kernel isn't encrypted. Some places are reporting it inaccurately.
I still wonder why HN seems hesitant to develop the HN platform further (although I'm relatively new to the site, so I don't know the history).
The biggest thing is still a better way to browse/post on iOS.
I find very little use teaching or using the 5 categories of Searle for interpretation of verbal or written speech acts.
I find studying a locution from illocutionary intent or perlocutionary intent more useful than Assertive, Directive, etc.
Hope it made sense and it was a useful answer! I still find it a fascinating field that is under-utilized because people try to make it into a programming language (a la Searle) instead of a way to understand semantics and semantic intent.
My home setup still doesn't work with Back to My Mac (and hasn't for years).