Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

so_good_so_far t1_itianwv wrote

Sure that's true, it just quickly renders the word meaningless if we have no cut-off on complexity (arbitrary though it may be), so what's the point? A rock is intelligent if we have no limit. My point is we can have a word that means literally nothing, sure, or we can say it requires levels of complexity that I don't think this grass comes remotely near.


ChucktheUnicorn t1_itid5uz wrote

Where would that cutoff be then? Seems like it's quite subjective and there really isn't an agreed upon point - so we'd each be using different definitions of the word if we went with that