objective, redundant, maybe both?

Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2017 07:46 pm
i heard someone say 'a tree is always a tree', and arguing that that statement is always objective.
to me however, it seems redundant, because by definition a tree is always a tree.
i'm wondering which one is it, objective or redundant? or is it both?
(also not sure whether the riddle tag fits or not)
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 3,258 • Replies: 2
No top replies

View best answer, chosen by ration
  Selected Answer
Reply Fri 7 Apr, 2017 09:20 pm
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2017 02:29 am
thank you, i knew there was a better word than redundant for this, it just never came to mind.
0 Replies

Related Topics

Riddle 44 - Question by lemal15
Christmas Math - Question by libertydawn
the soldier - Question by coacoa09
Marbles in a Bag - Riddle - Question by Valedictum
Sneaky Sequences - Question by Rainy
BOXES AND BOXES - Question by Valedictum
Whats 2 of 7 but not a number? - Discussion by Yams67
A personification riddle - Discussion by Gollumscave
Riddle: a predator - Discussion by Gollumscave
  1. Forums
  2. » objective, redundant, maybe both?
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/07/2023 at 11:03:13