You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
1 + 1 = 2. But suppose we sexualize the plus sign: then 1 + 1 = 3 presents no difficulty. But it does not mean that 1 + 1 must = 3. For that, it would be necessary to do more than sexualize the plus sign. It would be necessary to make it at least ♂ + ♀ = 3. It would probably be necessary to make the plus sign mean ‘sexual intercourse with intent to procreate children in adequate conditions between adequate people’.
What is happening here is that the plus sign is being treated as a variable as well as the terms of the expression. What mathematics can evolve if all the signs and terms in an expression are variables? There would seem to be nothing but chaos possible, but it is not so. For example, 1 + 1 = 3 has a meaning if I say 1 = a man, and 1 = a woman. In this case the ‘value’ of the plus sign has been affected ‘contextually’. This reminds me of ‘contextually’ contingent propositions (Braithwaite, Scientific Explanation, p. 112).