Actually you can use the word "paradox" just to describe something nonsensical I believe.

i thought it was a reference to the axe question from the movie "John dies at the end"

Because it's tumblr. Most of them don't know what the words "irony", "paradox", "self-irony" or "originality" mean.

I'm pretty sure It wasn't named the Paradox Axe by Tumblr people though, but maybe the maker of it?

You sure that's not Funnyjunk?

what does self-irony mean anyway ? , NM googling it

heh funnyjunk dosn't know "originality"

Well, in this case, I guess you could call it..........

wait for it











woody


That's ok, I'll go die now.

Or "literally"

Oh, ESPECIALLY that.

There is an instance to use it as emphasis in something but it is not widely accepted and generally seen as incorrect because it is not the traditional definition and is often used to emphasis something that doesn't need it. Using as a means of emphasis is tricky at best and I would never try to present that to an English professor. I think the only reason it is even partially considered is because of how often it is abused by the teenage/younger generation.

Not when it's stuff like "I literally shat bricks" or "i literally died right now". That sort of thing.

Well... it still is correct. Just not necessarily palatable.

I dare you to literally **** a brick right now. That and literally die laughing.

Well, that's what an exaggeration is, isn't it?

I mean using "literally" for emphasis. Mark Twain used it often, as in Tom Sawyer:
"And when the middle of the afternoon came, from being a poor poverty-stricken boy in the morning, Tom was literally rolling in wealth."

Are you really using Mark Twain to make Tumblr look good? Mark Twain was a literary genius; Tumblr makes Samuel Johnson **** in his grave. Emphasis is a literary tool, not a comment tool.

No, I'm using Mark Twain to defend the English language.
A literary tool isn't restricted to novels, it can be used in any form of text that isn't transcript.
Actually, even in transcript, you can use emphasis. So, make that any form of text.

Still, I'd like to reiterate that I'm just saying it's correct, not that it's pleasant.

yeah,but literally shat bricks isn't near what they mean. Most of the time they had a sudden realization. that never made me **** or blow my mind. That is like saying. I literally almost died. when you stubbed your toe. I get bring attention and emphasis on a subject,but there is a difference between being a inch off and being a mile.

It's informal. It adds intensity to an already ****** comment. I've gone through so much College Composition that I can't stand horribly structured comments. Plus, it's Tumblr. Leave it at that.

No one gives a **** what you think or don't think is formal.
It's grammatically and structurally correct, and until you unveil your time machine, its going to stay that way.

but tumblr gives me porn

I'll give ya that

that just means he got enough money to make a pile and roll in it. lucky bastard

is it self irony that i didn't know what self irony was till today?

Or, more likely, because an axe was used to cut down the wood required to make that axe in the first place. The paradox doesn't make sense but it is a paradox.
Paradox: You need to cut down the tree to make the axe but you need the axe to cut down the tree.

You can tell you are one of the tumblr people.

THAT'S NOT A BLOODY PARADOX! A paradox is a question with two correct, mutually exclusive answers. No one ever follows the damn definition. Just like with irony.

There are multiple different definitions to the word paradox, the one being used here is the idea behind logical paradoxes. This specific example involves infinite regression ('A' must be true in order for 'B' to be true, but 'B' must be true in order for 'A' to be true.)

It's still not a paradox.

The idea behind the paradox in the paradox axe may be flawed but it still shares a common theme with popular logical paradoxes (that theme being infinite regression). Just because this specific logical paradox has an answer to it, doesn't make it not a paradox, paradoxes have been solved before.

No, a paradox is only supposed to seem like it doesn't have an answer. It can have a solution and still be a paradox.

No, no, no. I said it HAS an answer. Two, in fact. You just can't pinpoint one.

What you're talking about is a contradiction paradox, I'm talking about circular paradoxes. They're both paradoxes, just different kinds.

Even then, you can cut wood with stuff other than an axe. You could just break a branch off with your bare hands, for ****** sake.

That's why I said this paradox was flawed. But by the definition of 'infinite regression' and 'paradox' the axe is still technically a paradox.

So, the type of paradox you're talking about, is like saying "Today's opposite day" on opposite day. At least, if everything you said was true 100% of the time If you say it's opposite day, that means it can't be opposite day because everything say has the opposite meaning, but that means that it would in fact be opposite day, and it continues forever.

That's both an infinite regression paradox and a contradiction paradox. But, unlike the paradox axe, it is only a logical paradox it's not, strictly speaking, a paradox because it doesn't have a singular solution.