Yes! There's a whole ethics, if not politics, of language bond up in all of this. It's something Cavell is attentive to, exemplified in one of my favo...
I don't disagree, and the distinction is more a matter of degree than kind; after all, even stipulation is a kind of way of life, albeit a very 'thin'...
But, 'the philosophy of idealism' is a placeholder: it names, at best, a space or place where such a motivation might be found. Like: "it's East of he...
If one wants to call this essentialism (I'm not a fan), it's a very strange kind of essentialism: a grammatical essentialism and not a 'metaphysical' ...
There are a few things going on in the OP, some of which I'm myself trying to disentangle by writing about it. This...: ...comes closest to what's goi...
I agree, but importantly, it would not be houses and flowers (red bricks and peonies) that we're talking about. 'Houses do not turn into flowers!' mig...
But I didn't ask you to spell everything out. I asked you quite specifically about what force of necessity the distinction you've drawn has. What moti...
Sure, but I wasn't interpreting your claim. I don't much care about your claim - whatever it is - at all, and I believe the 'interpreting' was done by...
I'm not pitching philosophy against ordinary language. I'm pitching ordinary philosophy against senselessness. You say there's a 'context' for your cl...
But that is how it works. Or at least, in any real life scientific context where objectivity is said of expriments and their results. It's only here, ...
Right, so 'the existence of Jupiter' is not the kind of thing that can be qualified as objective - or not. You're projecting a grammar mistake onto th...
Well if objective just means reproducible under fixed conditions, does the opposite of that mean ‘subjective’? No. Some conditions simply cannot be fi...
Yawn. Objective just means reproducible under fixed conditions. Nothing more. The blather about mind and feelings and independence and perception and ...
Interpretations of what? Of a political scene which you proudly professed your ignorence about? No, it's not my job to educate an 'audience' who is si...
Ah yes, the old "I haven't seen it so it can't be true" excuse; coupled, no less, with the vapid "I don't look because I don't do politics anyway". Ou...
Exactly. The whole idea that reacting politically to an event like that is somehow taboo is incredibly stupid. Of course one ought to have a political...
The same. After all, Witty consistently and repeatedly stresses that what he has to say has nothing to do with discovering new facts, nothing to do wi...
Yep. Anthropological uses of language largely happen to fall under the rubric of everyday use, but the latter is not at all defined by or in relation ...
But I haven't at all 'excluded' that anthropological use; on the contrary, I see Witty as including that and more. The everyday use that Witty speaks ...
The anthropological reading trivializes everything Witty has to say. It's worse than useless, and ignores the entire development of the book up to thi...
Eh, i don't think either of us are going to particularly budge on this. I'll settle for noting that the idea of 'improper meaning' simply appears nowh...
§116 So, this is a fun one if only because I think it's one of the most misunderstood - and widely quoted - bits of the PI. It also helps to bring to ...
§110-§115 I don't like these sections at all, and find them more ranty than substantial. The thematics we've come across before in more interesting co...
A mistake in and of comprehension. An inbility to understand something has to do with one's understanding - education, brain capacity - not 'meaning'....
Not for Witty, it isn't. Maybe so - but this has nothing to do with the PI. 'Improper meaning' is still an awful locution. One mistakes what is meant,...
I still think it's an improper formulation. Meaning is in no way predicated on intention in Witty, and this includes when it doesn't conform to intent...
Ah, I missed this. Still alot of catching up to do! -- Also, to chime in on the post above: the very idea of 'proper and improper' meaning is, I think...
§109 §109 makes good on the distinction - first drawn in §89 - between facts and understanding. Recall: §89: "Not, however, as if to this end we had t...
You're naive in the extreme if you think a person's beliefs and ways of life are not intimately constitutive of who they are, and that comments on the...
The OP is exactly like 'my list'. It's an effort to encourage a cultural and religious pissing contest where a full one sixth of the human population ...
OK. Perhaps some of this will come out later in the exegesis. And apologies if I don't want to spend too long on your previous post. It was too large ...
Get stuffed. I'm not giving you a crash course on Australian politics because you think I'm implying something that I did not. Maybe you can read up a...
Is this abhorrent to you? Oh, and also, our PM, Scott Morrison, is a shitbag enabler who is most certainly culpable - though not alone - for fostering...
*yawn*. Banno's point - that murderers like the Christchurch shooter were precipitated out of the same culture which we tend to call 'ours' - is fairl...
§108 §108 can be partly read as a rejoinder to §93/95/96 where Witty was making fun of those who - like his previous self - insisted on the 'uniquenes...
§105-§107 These sections seem to elaborate on the metaphorics of 'depth' first mentioned in §89. The rough idea seems to be that we want to look 'bene...
Good discussion, all very helpful! I was looking at Baker and Hacker for a bit of insight, and it turns out that §104 was originally located elsewhere...
But what if the coin was six dimensional, had four faces, magic powers, ate cornflakes for breakfast, but also not conflakes for breakfast, and was ma...
Comments