July’s poem
This poem is for the eliminated World Cup teams. The thing about international soccer is, you can’t just go out and buy the crucial missing pieces. You make do with what you have. (But if you’re France, you already have “imported” so many pieces that everybody else is scrambling for your castoffs.)
It’s demoralizing knowing that, however well you use what you have, you or whoever beats you will eventually surrender to France.
(From The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes, edited by Iona & Peter Opie. Recited, in The Clocks, by Hercule Poirot. Previous versions due to: Benjamin Franklin, in Poor Richard’s Almanack; the poet George Herbert; the Germans; and the French.)
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Is the “want of a horseshoe nail” an “INUS” condition? (That is: an insufficient but necessary part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition; in ordinary English: a cause. See: J. L. Mackie.)
Losing the battle might suffice for losing the kingdom, even if the kingdom could be lost in other ways: e.g., by meteor strike.
Losing the rider might suffice for losing the battle, even if the battle could be lost in other ways: e.g., by meteor strike.
And so on, for each preceding line. (Let’s say the meteorite gets smaller and smaller.)
Or is causation better analyzed in some other way? I’m getting too old for this.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Q: What was the “horseshoe nail” that Ecuador wanted?
A: Goals. And (controversially), according to some journalists, avoiding getting death threats from Mexican cartels.
It’s demoralizing knowing that, however well you use what you have, you or whoever beats you will eventually surrender to France.
⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯
For want of a nail the shoe was lost,
For want of a shoe the horse was lost,
For want of a horse the rider was lost,
For want of a rider the battle was lost,
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost –
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.
⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯
(From The Oxford Dictionary of Nursery Rhymes, edited by Iona & Peter Opie. Recited, in The Clocks, by Hercule Poirot. Previous versions due to: Benjamin Franklin, in Poor Richard’s Almanack; the poet George Herbert; the Germans; and the French.)
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Is the “want of a horseshoe nail” an “INUS” condition? (That is: an insufficient but necessary part of an unnecessary but sufficient condition; in ordinary English: a cause. See: J. L. Mackie.)
Losing the battle might suffice for losing the kingdom, even if the kingdom could be lost in other ways: e.g., by meteor strike.
Losing the rider might suffice for losing the battle, even if the battle could be lost in other ways: e.g., by meteor strike.
And so on, for each preceding line. (Let’s say the meteorite gets smaller and smaller.)
Or is causation better analyzed in some other way? I’m getting too old for this.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Q: What was the “horseshoe nail” that Ecuador wanted?
A: Goals. And (controversially), according to some journalists, avoiding getting death threats from Mexican cartels.
