In Strict Order of Appearance (Was: In 'Strict' Alphabetic Order

We are discussing with L. J. Kramer, "In order of appearance", THIS BLOG -- comment No. 16, whether there is, as he calls it, a Logic, or as I prefer, knowing him, a rationale behind Grice's dropping his twelvefold antipathy, as he calls it.

"Your problem is with Phainomenalismus", he writes.
For Greek Phi came after the Ypsilon, which leaves
your Mechanism de-Funct."

---

I object to the effect (i.e. I object, because I think there is a good effect in) that Grice is probably having something _deeper_ in mind.

"What about 'strict' alphabetical order, then?", I ask.

"Otiose", he says.

"But it _is_ used -- by stars and stuff. Michelle Pfeifer, for example, and others."

"It's a Hollywood thing. Surely you're not expecting she is going to play your Minimalism (game)".

"No".

-----


Kramer:

"Sometimes, we do use alphabetical order,
and say so, and even over-say so (e.g by
adding 'strictly') to prevent A
for seeking a deeper psychological
meaning in an apparently unordered
list while making the point that the
order does not communicate a
substantive ranking."

"I suggest in _strict_ order of appearance".

"But this is a dream," I object.

"You mean a nightmare".