Monday, January 25, 2010

a question of ontology I guess


Do restrooms really exist? or not? And who "are" they for? Thanks, Dan.

11 comments:

toep said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
toep said...

GOTTA love it, existential restrooms! But firecodes limit them to no more than four.



WV:

toep said...

Perhaps Descartes might be paraphrased effectively here "I stink, therefore i am"

Naked Bunny with a Whip said...

"May I have your attention, please! I need to pee! I need three other customers to accompany me!"

Nathan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nathan said...

Since they used "4" instead of "for", maybe they wanted to make it clear that it was a deliberate choice to use "are" instead of the more stylistically consistent "R".

46 Long Blake said...

See, I thought it meant that the role of the restrooms tonight was being played by only four customers. We're not telling you who until you order. Use them as you wish or need.

bethany said...

I was zealously deleting spam this morning and I may have deleted a real comment. Sorry about that!

toep said...

so, Bethany bathrooms "are" but "blog" comments? Not so much!

RC said...

yea, i don't even begin to understand this one.

gregory said...

it has to be because they know restrooms "are" sentient. and that customers seeking a prophet on the "mount" will spend all their time in the bathroom and not ordering pancakes or what have you. and so they strictly limit attendance to "4"