Metaphysician Undercover

I disagree with this. Meaning goes far beyond, and is much deeper than "the way a word is used". There is meaning in human relations, we have meaningf...

When you write "a" and "a" as two distinct things, and ask about the difference between these two things, you have given us the premise that they are ...

The inanimate thing is not driven toward a goal, by desire, spirit, or ambition within it, as human beings are, It is "directed by some being endowed ...

I think there is a problem with "meaning" is "use". "Use" does not seem to capture all of what meaning is. When someone is sitting on the stump, and y...

Laws of physics are the way we describe order, they are not the cause of that order. The idea is that if there is order, which we can describe with la...

Right, this is the point. If we are not striving after an ideal, then what are we striving after? If any vague, unclear, or ambiguous sentence is in i...

I think the argument would be something like this. If inanimate things behave in an orderly way (a way describable by laws of physics for example), th...

OK, so do you recognize that these instances do not refer to different types of ideals? There are different types of things referred to here, language...

No, he's not talking about different types of ideals. He is talking about striving after "the idea". If he talks about ideal this, or ideal that, idea...

I don't see your distinction. How is ideal exactness any different from any other ideal, qua 'ideal"? So how is "ideal" in the sense of ideal exactnes...

Of course he did, that's why the divine act is thinking about thinking, not just plain old thinking. Thinking requires an object, what is thought abou...

Whether you call it "ideal exactness", or "the ideal exactness" is not relevant, we are talking about the same thing. And yes, he is criticising this ...

I agree, "purpose", and "goal' are reasonably synonymous with "end". I don't think I'd agree with Aaron in the following quote, because I think Aquina...

I think we need to get a good understanding of what is meant by this. It is only to the extent that anything, (animate or inanimate), is engaged in ac...

Didn't what?

98 is important because it is a clear and unambiguous separation between "ideal" and "perfect". This separation was started at 81, where he discussed ...

A goal implies an ideal, obtaining that goal is the ideal. Anytime there is a goal, an ideal is assumed. So unless we can get to a description of lang...

As I explained in the post, if it is all just one way of using language, that way assumes ideals. So if all forms of language use are reducible to one...

That sounds more like the big business which farming really is in North America. Is this practical?

Here's another issue which has since come to my mind. If we have these two fundamentally different ways of using language, the one assumes an ideal, a...

Refer to the last book of "Nichomachean Ethics". The entire NE is an extremely good read, which all human beings would benefit from reading. The highe...

That seems to be fundamental, there cannot be any fact of the matter about where a particle is between observations. To me that says that the particle...

If we're talking about rules for getting things done, then I think ethics is unavoidable. If there are rules for getting things done, which are incomp...

If most interpretations reject objective reality, then how is the article referred to in the op saying anything new?

This question assumes essentialism. If there is such a thing as what a door is, that is the essence of "door". For Aristotle this essence becomes the ...

If you reject "objective reality", is there any interpretation other than Many Worlds which is acceptable?

If I understand correctly, you are saying that there is an understanding which is shared (mutual), and this understanding concerns some rules about ac...

There is no such thing as the middle ground between these two because they are two distinct forms of art which cannot be united into one. One is stati...

Let me see if I can understand this. The builder and the assistant are doing something together, building something. This is cooperation. I would say ...

Each one is contradictory in its own right. The first, I assume one thing "multiply present" means one thing that is a multiplicity of itself, which i...

I think your (1) and (2) are expressed in a way so as to be contradictory.

You'll find it hard to get agreement on this, so let's start with something simple. Words are shared. Are they not? Anyone disagree?

Consider the inquiry at 88. It appears like there might be a distinction between an exact explanation and an inexact explanation, as two distinct type...

The point though, is that Wittgenstein is making no such distinction between types of explanation at 87. Luke is making this distinction. So that dist...

Yeah, they'll panic, as they sit there stuffing their faces, while the hordes prepare to attack. Wall building is itself already an act of panic.

He said we must do away with "all explanation", to be replaced with "description". The point being that explanation is always intended to clarify some...

Wittgenstein is saying that it cannot be done, and implying that we're fools for trying. That's the point about the ideal, we cannot make language int...

Sorry Luke, I can't even begin to understand what you're saying about "explanation". It's completely out of line with what's in the text. And the rest...

Would you agree that confidence is required for activity, and doubt being an activity therefore requires confidence, but certainty is a special type o...

I think that explanation in general, as the means by which we remove doubt, is being rejected, for the reason that explanation cannot remove doubt unl...

I've described that so many times now, in so many different ways, at least three, so if you still don't understand, then I guess that's the way it wil...

Notice the bracketed remark "(One might say: the axis of reference of our examination must be rotated, but about the fixed point of our real need.)" W...

Yes, notice Fooloso4's reference to 108. "The preconceived idea of crystalline purity can only be removed by turning our whole examination round." Tha...

Didn't you already say that you were having trouble with 109? Try reading it from my perspective, 109 makes perfect sense.

That's not true, in this section 95-105 he is telling us that the notion of "ideal" is distorting the way that we see things. Go back and read what he...

Of course there is room for perfection here, that's what 98 says, even the vaguest sentence is in its own way perfect. There is no room for "ideal" th...

Luke sees boundaries, I just see the picture. Targets might be what creates boundaries within the picture, but there is no such thing as "the target",...

You know they weren't even using IQ tests back then, don't you? There is definitely a method which is being described here. That's what learning is, a...

That's right, it's the point I've been trying to make for days now, Wittgenstein's method for restricting doubt does not fulfil its purpose. Clearly t...

To disagree with the effectiveness of my example is one thing, but the conclusion you've made about my purpose is absurd, so I think this serves as a ...