Happy Thursday! As you see, Hili is making tentative forays into the murky hinterlands of feline religious philosophy. Now I’m not sure what the Ontological Argument for Fleas is, unless it’s the claim that a cat with fleas is the greatest cat that one can conceive of—greater than a cat without fleas—and therefore cats with fleas exist. But I may be wrong. Still, as with the Ontological Argument for God, it fails because of its lack of empirical content.
Hili: I’m thinking about ontological proof for the existence of fleas.
A: We have real proofs, we do not need bad philosophy.
Hili: Yes, but I’m entertaining my mind.
In Polish:
Hili: Zastanawiam się nad dowodem ontologicznym na istnienie pcheł.
Ja: Mamy prawdziwe dowody, nie potrzebujemy złej filozofii.
Hili: Tak, ale zabawiam mój umysł.
Would the law go something like:
1. By definition, Ceiling Cat is a Cat than which none greater can be imagined.
2. A Cat that necessarily exists without fleas is greater than a cat that can have fleas.
3. Thus, by definition, if a Cat may have fleas, and can only imagine in the mind its own eternal flealessness, then it can know it is not Ceiling Cat.
4. A Cat knows it can have fleas.
5. Therefore fleas exist in reality to preserve the humility of Cats and avoid any claim to being Ceiling Cat.
Might need a little tweaking yet, it’s early still. 🙂
Which flea is the greater? –
Ctenocephalides felis
or
Ctenocephalides canis
???
And I say Ramen to that!
🐝
Beehave!
😉
Couldn’t find me no fleeze…
The flea is on the keyboard, just to the left of the mite. It looks like this: ,
😀
She could have a lovely conversation with Peyton about how many angels can dance on the end of a Dipteran’s bristle. Of course, the whole time, Peyton would be thinking “Oh for f**ksake!”
Then they could have a laugh when Hili explains she’s mocking Serious Theology™. Oh, those Polish rationalist cats! So droll!
Methinks such a discussion could go on ad infinitum.
b&
And of course there is the dyslexic atheist flea…
“There is no dog.”