![]() I can recall with toe-curling clarity the barely-concealed delight of my English Tutor as I blundered in to his cerebral ambush: “So, Daniel, does a table… and so does a camel!”Īs I wallowed in the quagmire of the absurdity of this conundrum, I vowed never again - never, ever again - to fall prey to such an innocent question, so simple and pure in construct yet so devilishly complex to answer… ![]() “The answer”, I declared with the temerity of youthful ignorance, “is that it has four legs and I can sit on it”. Over the centuries, philosophers have pre-occupied themselves with the enticingly straight-forward, yet tantalisingly complex question of why a chair is indeed a ‘chair’. I remember, in the dim-and-distant, swirling mists of my memory, when I was confronted by just this very same question by my English Tutor. Originally published a Year Ago, with the publication this month of the Lloyd's Thematic Review - Line slips and Consortia, it is time again to wheel out the Camel and the Chair.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |