A lot depends here on what you call proof and when proof is the appropriate way to go and when alternatives need to be found. I'm not sure I'm happy w...
You are right. That remark is more complicated than it seems. It is true that to seek to disprove everybody else's solipsism is something that only a ...
I didn't think I was, although we may have different definitions. For me, objectivity is true or false. Subjectivity is neither. I didn't mean to say ...
For most people, I think, if something can be true or can be false, it is objective. There's no truth or falsity to something subjective. Do you mean ...
It is true that our perception and sensation can sometimes mislead us. But "sometimes" means that sometimes they do not mislead us. That looks like ob...
Well, yes. But can an anti-realist know that there is more than one anti-realist? I think not, and that's why I think that the only consistent form of...
Yes. "Sentence" and "statement" are just about acceptable. "Thought" and "judgement" are also very dubious. That wasn't my summary of the argument. I ...
In a way, I'm fine with the first sentence. My problem is that we seem to hunger for a way of metaphorically pulling everything together under one hea...
Quite so. That gives us some ground to treat the speculative physics that we hear so much about as somewhat different from this game. The speculations...
Yes. You are right. My main point, though, was the structure of type and token that enables to say that it is the same symbol in many places and many ...
Just a small point. What I "actually" point to is a mark on wall or paper. That mark is a token of the type "7". It is a sign or symbol for the number...
Perhaps you are right. Quantum physics always seem to shroud everything in a fog, anyway. I may well have misunderstood you. I find myself floundering...
Yes. But the challenge is to explain exactly what the word "reality" is guilty of - or, better, what we are guilty of when we misuse the word "reality...
OK. I canunderstand wanting something to keep and refer to. There was much more meat than I expected. I'm thinking that many people would get more out...
Thank you. I'm afraid I'll need to be brief. Yes. It was a lazy choice. I had in mind a certain uncertainty I have about the borderline between logic ...
Yes. It's almost as if objective and subjective have become nouns. I always thought that the ellipsis in "objective" and "subjective" was "proposition...
All of that is what we start with - the inheritance we are lumbered with. We do well to examine it closely. There are good things in it, however. The ...
You mean that Descartes was looking for, and thought he had found something permanent on which he could build a whole system of knowledge - permanent ...
You remind me of Descartes and his project of universal doubt. But I think taking on everything at the same time, is unlikely to be fruitful. It would...
I've been wondering whether to go on and read the Brown Book. This is astonishing, because he is putting in to question what elsewhere - especially in...
I'm sorry I didn't notice. But disappointed that you think it doesn't matter. It depends what your project is, so I won't argue with you. In a sense t...
I struggle to articulate the difference. It is tempting to say that they express different propositional attitudes. But I don't like propositional att...
Normally, they wouldn't. That's why it seems to odd that you want to ignore "know". I know you explained that, but it seems to me a pragmatic reason, ...
It is complicated. I was hinting at the criticism of Ryle, not on philosophical grounds, but on political (small "p") grounds. He acquired a great dea...
Well, one of the less happy consequences of high-lighting issues of language in philosophy is that it can all too easily seem as if that's all that ph...
That's right, if you are only thinking about the first person use - "I know that...", "I believe that...", "I think that...". Things are different if ...
I think we should look to the question to see whether the empirical projects are framed by the same question(s) as Wittgenstein's. I would go a step f...
I don't really understand what work "epistemically" is doing here. However it is true that "I think that p" and "I believe that p" both indicate that ...
No, I wasn't going there. There's nothing wrong with having different approaches around the same subject/object. I would need to do quite a lot more w...
Perhaps not. Sadly Chomsky was just three years too late. He didn't develop the theory of transformational grammar until 1955. The argument that there...
I found myself unable to reply to coherently to this. I suspect it needs a book. I don't know the best way to evaluate his work. I think he will have ...
On thinking about this, I've come to the conclusion that perhaps all we need to say is that the study of the logic of our language and the study of ho...
I'm sorry I wasn't clear enough. Is this the question? That's my answer. I'm aware of the principle and who first propounded it. It would be very help...
The former are what you call rules of man and the latter are laws of nature. I suspect that everything else in your definition follows from that disti...
I see that you have changed your text. So I guess there was a typo. Don't worry. Everybody does that from time to time. I'm sorry, I don't understand ...
I'm not interested in refuting your definitions. I'm trying to understand them. Then I'll be able to to evaluate them. But I doubt my verdict would be...
I see three different uses of language games here. One is their use as an analytical tool; the paradigm example is the builders at the beginning of PI...
Yes. I don't have a complete answer. The UK and USA have laws prohibiting euthanasia. Those laws apply to those who think it moral and those who think...
I think that Wittgenstein later discussion of "seeing an aspect" (interpretation) as in a puzzle picture. The solipsist is not wrong, exactly, but is ...
Just to be clear. I'm not disagreeing with what you say about this. I'm observing that "what we would say.." needs explaining - and, to be honest - I'...
Yes. The clearest case is whether there is a debate about whether a moral "law" should be made a law. There's also some dubious ground in the idea tha...
Yes. But I think you have some issues to sort out. 1) The relationship between the ideas that human beings have about how nature works and how nature ...
That works perfectly well if you are thinking of human laws. The "rules of man" has somewhat wider scope, which complicates the issue. Non-legal rules...
Yes. But the way we frame the method, it looks very like an empirical/sociological argument. "We say.." "We wouldn't say..." Gellner got very hung up ...
Yes, that's true. Perhaps I'm overdoing it, but I find myself thinking that examples are not fully described and so the proposed response is not entir...
Thanks for the replies. I can't respond until tomorrow, I'm afraid. I would like to wait (procrastinate) thinking about an overall analysis to see wha...
Section 19 pp. 65 - 69 More about solipsism, meaning as use, and pain After the tricky discussion of "it is always I who see when anything is seen", (...
There are two mistakes here. One is thinking that because those signs fit the model of "signifier" and "signified", the same model has to fit all sign...
Comments