...one pilot is Jewish and the other is Chinese. It’s an awkwardly silent flight, and obviously they don’t get along. Some time into the flight, the Jewish pilot mutters “I don’t like Chinese.”
“Don’t like Chinese? Why not?”
“The Chinese bombed
“But the Chinese didn’t bomb
“Chinese…Japanese…Vietnamese….they’re all the same”
Some more time passes and the Chinese pilot says “I don’t like Jews”
“You don’t like Jews? Why not?”
“Jews sank the Titanic, that’s why”
“But Jews didn’t sink the Titanic, an iceberg did”
“Iceberg…Goldberg…Steinberg…they’re all the same”
The underlying philosophy of this political joke is logic and it is an example of a deductive fallacy. Deductive logic reasons from the general to the particular (Cathcart & Klein 34). The Jewish pilot ignorantly generalizes about Asian ethnicities ending in –nese, thus associating the Chinese with
2 comments:
do you think this would be clearer if they graphically mirrored each other..?
perhaps the 'nese' territory is actually seen inverted...about the central (horizontal) mirror line...
the later 'berg' would then be understood as revealing the 'berg' territory in addition to its logic...
this may also provide formal clarity as the two four letter surnames would align...they should be held to the right...yes or no?
the last part said another way...i think its clearer if the surnames (suffix as you say) occupy the right side of the page...as we write left to right...right?
Post a Comment