Banno

That sounds interesting. What is it to have the property of being treated with language on idle? Not to be said, but to be shown?

But how are they being used now?

OK, I was in the wrong. My apologies. Please continue. Bedtime, anyway.

No. The bits from before my third birthday remain sketchy. You are in the way of a conversation I am having with March.

Just so. I set in bold the relevant piece. Why think that the answer to our differences of opinion can be found by doing ethics? That there is an answ...

Cool. I have no access to the entire experience of time, and so I will have to take your word for it.

:wink: There is plenty for philosophers to do, in the details.

After all, it doesn't exist unless it is measured... Like claiming that mountains do not have a height until they are measured. At he very least, i pr...

"Ask a physicist". Every now and then a neophyte comes along asking if time really exists. My Wittgenstein style joke is, ask me tomorrow.

You will always be able to point to some issue and say "but you haven't solved that one yet". But not having found the solution does not mean that the...

Of course experience is in one's mind. That's another example of sorting out a conceptual knot.

Some issues have been, to my satisfaction. And that's what counts.

SO another way of using "exists" is "can be measured". Which is right? The one that works.

What we should be doing is not arguing the case, but understanding how the case might be argued. SO perhaps unicorns exist, in that we can talk about ...

Is measurement special in some way?

Sure. Note that the argument here is not about the details, but the philosophical method being used. So when you say "But Unicorns do not exist", You ...

Well, here's how it might be done. The details are, of course, debatable. SO let's go back to a word game from Austin, Quine and others. To say that s...

Yes.

Or, if you like, I will make the claim that philosophy consists in sorting out grammatical structures that appear, on the face of it, problematic; it ...

We could work down@"fdrake"'s list...

Yeah, strong and slightly ironic. After all, I'm here, doing philosophy by saying we shouldn't bother with philosophy. I can't help myself...

Ah. Linguistic Philosophy differs in being the view that philosophy is best done by linguistic analysis. So it is not philosophy of linguistics. It ma...

Perhaps. My memory is not as good as I remember it to be.

Yes, it might well be.

Hm. Philosophy of language or linguistic philosophy. Perhaps we have started out with an issue of ambiguity. I do tend to use "philosophy of language"...

...and interjections from others that detract from the flow of the argument. Yep.

I'm not at all averse to more formal debates, if you like that sort of thing. The topic would need clarification.

Pretty sure I've read it somewhere, and since I don't read Greek, so there must be a translation...

Sure it is. You think there is a symmetry between John and Mary. There isn't.

You might think so. Should we argue over that here, or in another thread? How to proceed?

...unless some philosophy of language is philosophy of mind... Profesional philosophers have moved on, it seems; but then, they have to do something i...

Indeed; your work here is done.

For clarity I am using sex, male, female; and gender, man, woman. Hence a male who says they are female is ipso facto wrong. However there is nothing ...

I would happily have said "dissolution" instead of "study". But often the fly enjoys being in the bottle.

Indeed; Philosophy of Language is, in the end, the whole of philosophy.

What is philosophical in each of these issues is cleaning up and setting out what is being asked or claimed in each case. After that they reduce to ph...

My introduction to Philosophy of Language was Austin and Searle, followed by Davidson. My knowledge of Wittgenstein at that stage was tertiary. Years ...

More popcorn...

Tis takes us back to the OP.

What is meaning. then? I sugest it is the understanding of, and interpretation of - the use of - our utterances. Again, meaning is not in the head of ...

Sure, but coherentism is circular. And what we count as being true... is the stuff we believe, isn't it? Which is what I am saying. SO now we agree?

Here again, you think meaning is in one person's head, I think it is something we build together. I'm right. Your reply, above, is the sort of thing t...

so, circularity.

If every truth must have a justification, which will you choose - infinite regress or circularity?

That's not so. As everyday conversation demonstrates, we do share such understandings.

See the OP.

Apparently there is: The action of speaking or acting in accordance with the truth.

Here you appear to be using "verification" for some form of interpretation - so are you saying that in order to be true a proposition must be understo...

Perhaps. I find your position incomprehensible.

I am supporting trans people professionally. I find myself looking for a better view of their situation.