Comments on: This is the title of this post.

This is the title of this post.

cortex — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:36:26 -0800

- This is the Title of this Story
- Self-reference in 'Self-reference in...'
- This is Not the Title of this Essay
- How I explained infodumps and saved humanity

Wonkier tangents: - on quines (self-replication in computer programs) - Peter Suber on self-reference in law. Obligatory xkcd. Related previous posts: 1, 2.

By: papakwanz

papakwanz — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:39:29 -0800

Fun stuff.

By: DU

DU — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:47:13 -0800

This is NOT the comment where I claim this is old hat when actually I really liked the infodumps thing.

By: Astro Zombie

Astro Zombie — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:49:52 -0800

You are not currently reading a comment by Astro Zombie where he claims to hate this sort of thing.

By: tiny crocodile

tiny crocodile — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:52:09 -0800

This is not a novel. Nor is this.

By: bondcliff

bondcliff — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:55:08 -0800

Title of the Song

By: Pastabagel

Pastabagel — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:55:31 -0800

In Which Our Humble Hero Posts a Comment Without Reading the Entirety of the Links First. This is the first sentence where I state my hyperbolic opinion on the topic. This is the second more reasonable sentence, where I retreat from the extreme position staked out in the opening sentence. This is the first example I cite in support of my opinion, which also serves as a veiled and ultimately unsuccessful attempt at a derail. This is my second paragraph, where I establish a rather reasonable position on the topic far from the extremes of the first paragraph. This is you realizing the first paragraph was just to hook you in. This is you hooked in, still reading.

By: bondcliff

bondcliff — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:57:26 -0800

Note to self: read all links before posting, some dumbass might have already posted that song in one of them.

By: omegar

omegar — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:57:49 -0800

I like the contents of this post, but not its title.

By: nanojath

nanojath — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:09:01 -0800

Anyone who bothers to post in this thread is a huge nerd.

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:09:23 -0800

I wrote a quine once. I can now use it for nerd points, but not much else.

By: DU

DU — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:13:57 -0800

That comment wasn't very self-referential, Plutor. Oh wait, neither is this one!

By: milestogo

milestogo — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:20:13 -0800

If I were to post a comment it would look something like this.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:23:49 -0800

Someone help. Where's that hilarious trailer for a movie about the making of the trailer?

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:25:40 -0800

I love the "ouroboros" tag. Does the set of sets that contain themselves contain the null set?

By: vacapinta

vacapinta — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:29:07 -0800

There was a previous self-reference post where I posted a comment that linked to itself. Mefi moves too fast now to be able to have a good chance of doing that now. Instead, I assume we'll just get 100 more predictable comments that begin "This comment..." Self-reference was kind of interesting in the 1980's after everyone had picked up Hofstadter's GEB where he made the tantalizing suggestion that consciousness itself may be a Strange Loop, a dragon that eats its own tail, an entity which can model itself. That is self-reference begets complexity. I think though, that that has all been played out.

By: bondcliff

bondcliff — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:33:32 -0800

What he said. posted by bondcliff at 1:33 PM on January 24 [+] [!] What he said.

By: jasper411

jasper411 — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:34:52 -0800

Gregory Bateson used to write "metalogues," some of which were collected in the book Steps to an Ecology of Mind. The rule for a metalogue was that the dialog itself had to be the topic of the dialog in some way. He had an interest in paradoxes and understanding them by using Russell's theory of logical types. This was part of his theory about double binds being part of the context for a schizophrenic upbringing, i.e., the person couldn't say something but also couldn't say that he couldn't say it.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:35:47 -0800

Does the set of sets that contain themselves contain the null set? You know, I thought about working in an explicit Russell's Paradox angle, but I thought that might be overdoing it a bit.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:36:15 -0800

www.ThisInternetSite.com

By: Plutor

Plutor — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:40:04 -0800

Is "heterological" heterological? Is it possible to overdo a discussion about recursion?

By: miss lynnster

miss lynnster — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:41:26 -0800

This is not a love song.

By: blue_beetle

blue_beetle — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:41:36 -0800

That's what she said.

By: goodnewsfortheinsane

goodnewsfortheinsane — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:49:03 -0800

I know there's a "How To Read a Book", but I've always wanted to write a "How To Read this Book".

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:49:43 -0800

Is it possible to overdo a discussion about recursion? Hey, buddy, take it to metatalk.

By: Miko

Miko — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:53:30 -0800

'ere

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:55:18 -0800

This Is The Theme To Gary's Show.

By: Horace Rumpole

Horace Rumpole — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 10:58:15 -0800

This comment is a double.

By: Horace Rumpole

Horace Rumpole — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:00:17 -0800

[Too clever for my own good I guess. It won't let me post the second one.] This comment is a double.

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:04:19 -0800

Now this is what I'm talking about!

By: phatkitten

phatkitten — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:04:31 -0800

This comment is false.

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:06:44 -0800

This is not a love song. They should have put that on Album

By: fearfulsymmetry

fearfulsymmetry — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:10:27 -0800

This is not an image search

By: languagehat

languagehat — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:15:39 -0800

What I say.

By: marble

marble — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:19:42 -0800

generic mefi post (posted by me before I switched to use this username).

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:21:21 -0800

This is not a self-link

By: Citizen Premier

Citizen Premier — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:21:39 -0800

If S was the set of all sets that don't contain ostriches, and then if S was kind of shaped like an ostrich, wouldn't that be trippy?

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:22:09 -0800

This is not my beautiful wife.

By: Citizen Premier

Citizen Premier — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:24:50 -0800

And incidentally, no word in English means what you think it does--so please favorite this post as it is actually a very good poem in iambic pentameter.

By: Mister_A

Mister_A — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:28:12 -0800

Is this the sort of thing where you have to follow the links AND be a giant nerd in order to comment intelligently in thread?

By: sleepy pete

sleepy pete — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:28:52 -0800

Self-reference was kind of interesting in the 1600s as far as literature goes, if not earlier still. Sorry, cortex. Nice post.

By: kurumi

kurumi — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:31:22 -0800

A link to this post?

By: kurumi

kurumi — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:32:08 -0800

Dang, off by 2

By: Ambrosia Voyeur

Ambrosia Voyeur — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:48:02 -0800

obligatory

By: Pater Aletheias

Pater Aletheias — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:00:39 -0800

Generic Uptempo Folk Song

By: trip and a half

trip and a half — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:34:19 -0800

By: empath

empath — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 12:40:13 -0800

This comment has 27 favorites.

By: Jay Reimenschneider

Jay Reimenschneider — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:02:51 -0800

Irritating.

By: scruss

scruss — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:06:50 -0800

Review of mailboxes leads to review of mailboxes

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:07:58 -0800

The latter half of this comment is in

By: spiderwire

spiderwire — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:09:23 -0800

That Suber essay (this is the link to the entire thing) reminds me of a paper I wrote last year on self-reference as a normative basis for the law. My take was haphazard by comparison (and I considered not writing it), but for some reason I felt that, while Suber and others do a good job of exploring the problem, no one has really managed to nail down the solution. (Probably not too surprising, all things considered.) I find his whole exploration of the topic kind of frustratingly incomplete. Self-amendment isn't a particularly rich source of material -- the problem he's really trying to address is regression.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:09:36 -0800

This MetaFilter comment has three a's, one b, two c's, twenty-six e's, nine f's, one g, six h's, twelve i's, three l's, four m's, fourteen n's, nine o's, nine r's, twenty-four s's, sixteen t's, five u's, five v's, five w's, four x's, & three y's.

By: Wolfdog

Wolfdog — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:13:07 -0800

A Cretan without any couth He sentenced himself, and forsooth, Epimenedes lied, So he lived - therefore, died - So... he must have been telling the truth.

By: ijoshua

ijoshua — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:17:18 -0800

# "Does the set of sets that contain themselves contain the null set?" Consider the set of sets that have never been considered...

By: quin

quin — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:30:01 -0800

If I ever selfrep and produce a mini-clone, I'll call him quine (pronounced quin-ey). He'll be so cute with his little itty bitty cloven hooves. But I won't let him be self referential. None of this "This is me doing this" crap. I'll knock those bad habits right the fuck out of him. Just like I did to me back when I was first made.

By: Dizzy

Dizzy — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:58:15 -0800

This is not a pipe. YOU have the pipe. Please give me the pipe?

By: QuietDesperation

QuietDesperation — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:10:08 -0800

This sentence no verb.

By: caddis

caddis — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:14:02 -0800

By: silby

silby — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:06:51 -0800

The comment posted by silby at 6:06 EST is only self-referential if it appears in the thread about self-reference.

By: Meatbomb

Meatbomb — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:22:02 -0800

Hi! This is me, Meatbomb, typing a comment into the text box. There is a strange little story in the next paragraph, but don't worry, because although it might seem a little creepy at first it doesn't go anywhere at all, it is completely PG13. So, imagine that you aren't at your computer reading this comment on the screen. Instead, imagine that you are under my desk, here in Kabul. There's plenty of space down there, but it is a little uncomfortable because there are a tonne of power cords, and I keep curtly demanding that you don't unplug anything. It's chilly and pitch dark - all you can see is my bady reflected in the glow of this thread on the screen of my computer. As I type this comment, I read it to you down there under the desk. I am a slow typer, so by this point it is getting really irritating for you. It seems so pointless - there are plenty of chairs in the room, and there doesn't seem to be any good reason you should be under the table. In a moment I will hit the post button. With our job done, I help you out from under the desk, make you coffee, and then continue surfing the Internet. We did it! Mission accomplished! Thanks for your help getting this comment posted.

By: ROU_Xenophobe

ROU_Xenophobe — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 15:50:02 -0800

Infinite loop. N. See "loop, infinite."

By: Dipsomaniac

Dipsomaniac — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:11:40 -0800

This is the post that I would have made, had I been the person with username cortex, instead of not being such. The fact that I am not in no way invalidates the existence of cortex or the person that I in fact am.

By: AsYouKnow Bob

AsYouKnow Bob — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:25:55 -0800

Sorry, I don't have anything to add.

By: cortex

cortex — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:45:53 -0800

"AsYouKnow Bob", I mused to myself, "sounds so familiar..." Ah yes! I thought back to the early days of thread 68463, to the fourth link of the post. It was a short essay, in the form of an absurd dialogue between a professor and a student. "It's a reference to the very infodump technique discussed in that essay," I exclaimed. "How prescient!"

By: danb

danb — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:58:15 -0800

Today's toothpaste for dinner.

By: blasdelf

blasdelf — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:12:09 -0800

Does the set of sets that contain themselves contain the null set? No. Why would the null set contain a set?

By: not_on_display

not_on_display — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 21:19:32 -0800

This may be the coolest flash game ever. Although it's graphics are nothing to write home about, the game play (which I will wisely follow kotaku's example in not spoiling for you) is quite simply incredible. It's a unique and quick little work break for you via kotaku. Seriously. It's awesome.

By: eritain

eritain — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:41:57 -0800

Title of the Song All-purpose Folk Song Comment Consisting Entirely of Links

By: No Mutant Enemy

No Mutant Enemy — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 02:09:38 -0800

Previously.

By: tawny

tawny — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:23:10 -0800

irrelevant

By: Plutor

Plutor — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 07:59:32 -0800

eritain: "Comment Consisting Entirely of Links" That, right there, folks? Dedication.

By: blue shadows

blue shadows — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:07:36 -0800

If On A Winters Night A Traveller.

By: carsonb

carsonb — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:58:49 -0800

This used to live in my profile: This is a sentence beginning a paragraph about myself. Previous to this sentence, I began a paragraph about myself with a self-referential sentence rather than a me-referential sentence. This is that paragraph. The previous sentence is not really this paragraph; it is actually a sentence that is a part of the paragraph called "that paragraph" (which is this paragraph), whereas this sentence, arranged before the next three sentences and after the previous three sentences, consitutes the centerpiece of this paragraph. Without much to say about myself, this sentence is left to point out that the paragraph that contains it refers more to itself than myself. If this sentence were about me instead of about a part of this blurb about me it would be less self-referential and more me-referential. Too bad I am not more me-referential.

By: iamkimiam

iamkimiam — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:21:02 -0800

I think, therefore

By: danb

danb — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:16:03 -0800