View Full Version : Living Dead


alexb123
10-11-05, 03:40 PM
If the living dead die, are they then dead or the dead living dead?

GodlessEvil
10-11-05, 05:03 PM
There is no such thing as Living dead, it is bad english.

It is like saying "The HALF pregnant women!"
Or " It is BOILING cold"

They're just fucking dead, re-animated, the RE-animated dead, when you kill the re-animated, they aint animated and just dead.

Avatar
10-11-05, 05:17 PM
They're just fucking dead, re-animated, the RE-animated dead
nono, they're animated dead, reanimated dead would be zombies that are killed and then animated again.
so, a "killed" zombie would be a deanimated dead :m:

cosmictraveler
10-11-05, 05:19 PM
They would be Zombies

Avatar
10-11-05, 05:21 PM
zombie is not the most correct term, because its' origin is in the workings of voodoo priests braindamaging and turning into mindless slaves living humans by using some chemicals found in coastal fish

so a zombie in essence is a living human, but who's mind has been wiped out and only the basic instincts remain. not entirely unlike like in the film "28 days later"

a dead being risen from grave (or whatever) is to be called: animated dead

Roman
10-11-05, 06:23 PM
The things in 28 Days Later weren't zombies. A zombie in popular culture is a dullwitted, slow moving though powerful, hungry corpse. George Romero films depict what a zombie is, or at least should be.

Avatar
10-11-05, 06:28 PM
Wikipedia's entry about zombies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombies

alexb123
10-12-05, 10:19 AM
Jesus was never called a Zombie as far as I know, or re-animated, is it one rule for him and another rule for us?

alexb123
10-12-05, 10:21 AM
nono, they're animated dead, reanimated dead would be zombies that are killed and then animated again.
so, a "killed" zombie would be a deanimated dead :m:

Animated dead? Would that not be for example when Mr Burns from the Simpsons was killed?

And Re-Animated would be the frequent repeats on Channel 4?

dixxyman
10-13-05, 08:11 PM
Logically you can't make a conclusion since you have an invalid major premise (such as it is) and no minor premise. It is an illogical question.

Roman
10-13-05, 08:27 PM
Logically you can't make a conclusion since you have an invalid major premise (such as it is)

It's not invalid if you don't mind existential fallacies. If some elves live in forests, and all forest elves are green, then some elves are green. Nevermind that elves don't exist, my argument is valid.

and no minor premise.

It's implicit.

It is an illogical question.
It's a perfectly logical question. Just impractical.

dixxyman
10-13-05, 08:51 PM
The form is valid. The major premise is false so that no conclusion can be drawn.
All a's are bald
I am an a
therefore I am bald.