http://www.ted.com In this engrossing EG talk, architect Liz Diller shares her firm DS+R's more unusual work, including the Blur Building, whose walls are made of fog, and the revamped Alice Tully Hall, which is wrapped in glowing wooden skin.

Comments

1. The "fog pavilon" is a great idea. It has no practical aplications but art doesn't need to. Later on however an architectural problem may occure that could be solved by this concept. Experimenting is always exciting...
2. Maybe your just trying to say that the meaning cannot be found through "language" atleast none we know of, but that does not mean that it has no meaning, if it has purpose it must also have some "meaning" attributed to it. Perhaps you believe that I have used an argument of Circular Reasoning and I see where you might find that, However, I have simply used a Hypothetical Syllogism to prove that the point is valid.
3. I think the "fallacy" that your talking about would be more of "circular reasoning" than a fallacy of "equivalence" is there such a thing as a fallacy of equivalence? because as long as I have been in school I have encountered no such thing... perhaps if you could explain where this fallacy is i might be able to either find a better argument for the point im making, or dare i say... accept the point your trying to make?
4. Equivalencies are not logical fallacies, if i tell you that 1 + 1 = 2 you won't argue that point right? You would accept that 1 + 1 is in fact 2, not because i said it but because it is true. Yes i understand where you are comming from on this, she should not use words like "um" and "yeah" because they convey no meaning to US. Someone, somewhere could hear her "umm's" and "yeahs" and find some value in them, others apparently have, and by that alone it has meaning.
5. You are conflating the issue, again, and using an equivalency (logical fallacy). "If something is meaningless it has a definition, and an equivalent word for definition is meaning, so meaningless things have meaning." It seems logical but it's not, as you can see in this example. Again, I said her words, "um, ah, yadda yadda" carry no meaning, I understand they are useful to her, and I understand they sound bad so she shouldn't use them.
6. If a word has a definition it must have a meaning Sir. It must then be taken that meaningless noise, cannot be meaningless. Especially not taking into account perspective/knowledge and such. You believe that her noises have no meaning, BUT they do.. they help her process information, THAT in and of itself is enough to make it meaningful.
7. You are mixing up two things "conflating the issue." Meaningless noises are meaningless because, by definition, they convey no meaning. I didn't say they didn't help the lady think, I said she shouldn't be muttering nonsensical words in the middle of her sentences because it sounds bad. I understand why she is doing it, and I understand that she should just pause.
8. "meaningless noises"? wtf Read some Pinker. Its a subroutine to keep thoughts going,like couplings between traincars.
9. Non-fluencies are a big public speaking "no no" she should just pause, not try to fill the air with meaningless noises.
10. Again, nice. Is it Cristmas already?
11. The um's and ah's are just her brain buffering the prepared talk. I'm sure in front of 500+ people you would have the same mental loading/spinning circle, sy1234.