Banno

Thanks, Janus, for this thread. Moving off-topic discussion is standard practice. Analytic philosophy, considered as the broad thrust of English-speak...

I don't see the problem There are no private reds; there are no private beetles. And even if there were, nothing one says about them would be sensible...

Sure there are beetles. We just don't talk about them. Or better, folk do, but their talk makes no sense.

Yeah - you need your own office. And even then, the bloody interruptions can ruin your train of thought.

In my defence, it's a conditional... IF. It's intended to reinforce the argument that the question drops out of any relevance.

Cheers. Seems to me you are left defending a lost cause.

The notion of an internal red - a private sensation - cannot be made a coherent part of our public conversation. The problem is dissolved. There is on...

Sure. So I just deleted a two-hundred word reply. The T-sentence in this case gives two valid interpretations; we have to use our knowledge of the con...

Hmmm. I'm not sure that you have entirely demolished the T-schema. We would derive: "Bob put in a work-order for the ceiling" is true IFF Bob put in a...

I thought so, too. As well as ambiguity the paper talks, indirectly, about mis-comprehension. In the discussion above, between @"Oliver5" and @"Isaac"...

OK, let's try a different approach. Fred is suddenly certain that he has just stopped having a pain, of which he was unaware. Only in this case Fred i...

Just encouraging others to chime in...

Is Davidson a Gricean? Having a read of this.... Edit: @"creativesoul", the difference between Davidson and Grice suggested here is not at all dissimi...

So the YouTube version: Davidson argued we could best get at meaning by talking about truth. Grice argued that we could best get at meaning by talking...

Yep. What drew me back to this article was comments such as this: I take Oliver to here be advocating, roughly, first meaning. I pointed Oliver to Dav...

Odd, since I read Davidson as saying that intended meaning drops out, being replaced by That would be in line witht he semantic theory Davidson earlie...

I'm still trying to come to terms with the idea of @"StreetlightX" being magnanimous...

What's salient here is your claim that this is an inference: That's a series of unrelated statements, not an inference.

Well, shit. Finally there is some actual philosophy going down on this thread. Who'd a thunk it.

Roughly, yes - an utterance can only be malaprop in contrast to an appropriate utterance. A valid point. The interpretation, in Davidson's semantic th...

Well I must admit to having only given a passing nod to Grice. I had decided not to read beyond tertiary sources on the grounds that expounding uttere...

Would that be an inference or a memory? I say memory.

That's not an inference. That's repetition... ...but if they have not been in pain, then they have not stoped being in pain, and hence they answer "no...

No, I said What they agree or disagree to is irrelevant. But then, you think truth and belief are the very same, so I can see why this is a problem fo...

...now look what you have done, introducing that word...

Yep. And A would be wrong.

Not at all. Just the psychoceramisists.

You know the answer to that. Observer A will see a rod of length l. Observer B will see a rod of length l'. But observer A will also see that observer...

What is important about Aristotle is that he was wrong; and what is interesting about Aristotle is how he was wrong.

It's curious - there is more going on here. What exactly is the missing premise? "If I have stopped being in pain then I was previously in pain"? Ther...

...I am just trying to save you time...

:grin: I am quite enjoying this. Through gritted teeth. Give folk enough rope, and they can't help themselves.

Indeed, the Principle of Relativity has more general application. It says simply that the laws of physics are the same for all observers. In other wor...

...and so to the nearly circular conclusion. ...and... Wonderful stuff. A language isn't algorithmic; it does not conform; there are no fixed rules. T...

While your intent was to keep the ants away, you may have inadvertently lain down a sugar trail...

Going back... Shrug.

It would be entirely consistent With the US Constitution for it to contain a contradiction? Ok.

Black and white.

...for if one sets out such a general framework for language, then it will be incomplete. That strikes me as parallel to the incompleteness theorem. M...

By then there is a good chance the thread will be overrun by piss-ants.

None of which undermines this: "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution..."

Back to the topic... It's worth considering Wittgenstein's family resemblance here. No one thread runs through the length of the rope. Yet the rope is...

Then please, spend more time here telling of it...

Mrs Malaprop perhaps made mistakes in her use of language; Sheridan didn't. He put those words into her mouth with intent. As for replying to those po...

It seems that in a world were "research" consists in watching a ten-minute video by some dilettante on YouTube, it's considered too much to ask folk n...

Davidson talks somewhat briefly about achieving understanding as an interactive process. Would that he had spent a bit more time relating this to the ...

Who was right on certainty...Descartes or Lichtenburg? Wittgenstein.

I found it quite an amusing read. I was reminded of this piece on thinking again about the following anecdote... Wittgenstein had all too serious, lit...

But Hence, if a case is brought forward that asks if a given statute is constitutional, it falls under the remit of the Supreme Court.

Is that so? Given the wording of the US Constitution: "The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitutio...