CoL49 (6) Either ... or ...

[Paul Mackin]

On Sat, 11 Jul 2009, kelber at mindspring.com wrote:

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dave Monroe <against.the.dave at gmail.com>
>
> She had heard all about excluded middles; they were bad shit, to
>> be avoided." (ibid.)
>
>
> Clumsy wording or profundity?  How do you avoid something that isn't there?  But maybe that's the essence of paranoia.  Fallopian's explanation, that Oedipa's whole quest had been set in motion as a prank on Inverarity's part, is something that Oedipa had avoided looking at.  It falls between the 0 (there's just America out there) and the 1 (there IS a Tristero at work).  Along with Oedipa, we don't want to believe Fallopian.  In fact, I don't believe him.  Surely it's a case of getting Oedipa to ask the wrong questions.  So examining excluded middles can actually be harmful, if it deters you from examining the stark truth.
>
> Laura
>
Think it's just a hip way of saying a proposition is either true or not 
true.

Not sure everyone believes that nowadays.

P