Faulty reasoning. A piece of paper is a thing. A straw is another thing, which you can, if you wish, construct from a piece of paper. When a piece of paper is rolled into a straw, it gains a hole. Without the hole, it would not be a straw. The definition, and the very understanding of "straw" (in the sense of drinking straw) necessitates a hole. You can't have a drinking straw without a hole. But then, I suppose you could quibble about the definition of a hole, rather than using the definition that is in common speech and in dictionary definitions. But by such quibbling, you make the question itself meaningless, because you are writing your own definitions for words.
Faulty reasoning. A piece of paper is a thing. A straw is another thing, which you can, if you wish, construct from a piece of paper. When a piece of paper is rolled into a straw, it gains a hole. Without the hole, it would not be a straw. The definition, and the very understanding of "straw" (in the sense of drinking straw) necessitates a hole. You can't have a drinking straw without a hole. But then, I suppose you could quibble about the definition of a hole, rather than using the definition that is in common speech and in dictionary definitions. But by such quibbling, you make the question itself meaningless, because you are writing your own definitions for words.
(post is archived)