A procedural note: as may be inferred, both from context and 193, the boxes represent text messages. I really liked how they turned out, with the double-arrow effect; I think it's one of the neatest things to come along since the explosion in 129. As for what happened, well, I have no clue. It was shortly before eight in the morning on a Wednesday, and I got this series of texts. I do not know what context there was, nor the fate of the undergarment in question. Edutainment Time: the text in the middle panel is taken, word for word, from page 56 of my textbook (Deductive Logic, by Goldfarb). It was an Elementary Logic course, and actually quite fun. The statement essentially describes how to apply implication by avoiding the "use-mention fallacy": in order to state that schema A and schema B (i.e. two statements with truth value) logically imply schema C, we must use the term "implies," and we must refer to the schemata with their names, as opposed to just calling them. Example time. Schema A: The moon is made of cheese. Schema B: Dennis Kucinich is President. Schema C: The spaceship "Nibbler I," crewed by white mice, landed on Mars. None of these statements is true. A logical aspect of false statements is that they all imply each other. (Subexample: I can say that the sky is red, therefore the Earth is flat. That is self-evident: the sky is not red, and the Earth is round. If the sky were red, the Earth might be flat, but since it isn't, we don't know, and don't care.) Therefore. What you want to say is this: "Schema A and schema B jointly imply schema C." You can say it two ways: 1. "The statements 'The moon is made of cheese' and 'Dennis Kucinich is President' jointly imply that 'The spaceship "Nibbler I," crewed by white mice, landed on Mars'. 2. Since the moon is made of cheese, and Dennis Kucinich is President, then the spaceship "Nibbler I," crewed by white mice, landed on Mars. 1 is correct, 2 is false. Why? Because in 1 we referred to (that is, we mentioned) the schema, and in 2 we used them. And that is the use-mention fallacy! Two similar translations result in two completely different statements: one is logically sound, and the other is ludicrously false. Unless, of course, Kucinich really did become President, and crafted a masterful scheme to make it look like Obama won the 2008 election, so he could send the Nibbler to the moon to search for cheese. It's something he would do. I mean, he looks kinda like a mouse anyway.