The particular something is identified, as "a certain sensation". Is that the real ambiguity? You keep saying that the type-token distinction is irrel...
How definite do you need him to be? What more information do you need and why do you need it? How far does Wittgenstein need to go before you are sati...
In terms of the type-token distinction, the type is “a certain sensation”. How definite do you need him to be? What more information do you need and w...
The type is "a certain sensation". Exactly. The particular type has been identified - as "a certain sensation". What's your definition of "definite"? ...
"He knows he's in pain" is nonsense for the same reason that "I know I'm in pain" is nonsense - because one cannot surmise and verify that they are in...
The definite article can be used for both the type and a token. For example: "The blue whale is the largest mammal." "The giraffe has a very long neck...
So if you have a pain and it goes away for one year and then returns, it is still the same instance of the pain? You were just unaware of it for a who...
Answer the question I put to you: Should the diarist now mark “S” in their diary as per Wittgenstein’s instructions, or does “S” refer only to a singl...
You just asked why the person would mark “S” in their diary every day? Because that’s the scenario Wittgenstein describes at 258. What’s ambiguous abo...
Yes, it’s very ambiguous :roll: You don’t even know what the scenario of 258 says yet you claim to understand it better than all of us. Pull your head...
Make up your mind. Let me try one last time… Let’s say that the diarist has a single token of the sensation which lasts for 10 years. The diarist reco...
You recently made the issue about the meaning of the word “sensation”, with your claim that its meaning was not only ambiguous but that it could also ...
Your “justification” was that Wittgenstein uses “sensation” ambiguously to mean either “token”, “type” or “ambiguous”. I have pointed out several time...
The only potential ambiguity here, which I identified from the beginning, was Wittgenstein’s use of the word “certain” in the phrase “a certain sensat...
You brought it up again. It looks like you've now recognised your mistake in claiming that Wittgenstein uses the word "sensation" ambiguously, too. Go...
I don't know what you mean by "ambiguous" here. The meaning of the word "sensation" is not ambiguous. It is the meaning of the word "certain" that is ...
How is it ambiguous to define green as a colour? Green is a colour. Then the issue is not with the meaning of the word "sensation". That is not in que...
Wittgenstein uses the word "sensation" to refer to an "inner experience" such as pain. There is no ambiguity about it and none has coherently been poi...
You should theoretically be able to demonstrate (at some time) that you know how to play the tuba, whether one is handy or whether you can play one ri...
Where does he say at 261 that "sensation" has no referent or that we cannot say what it refers to? Let's say that what I meant by the statement "I am ...
I'm not sure that I understand in what sense it's a contradiction. It's not an easy question, but I think we could start by noting that claims to know...
What reason do you have for thinking that Wittgenstein intends multiple interpretations of the word "sensation"? This might seem like a silly question...
Whether intentional or not, “ambiguous” means that a word has more than one possible meaning, not - as you claim - that a word has no possible meaning...
If you agree that the statement is nonsense, then wouldn’t you agree that it’s not truth apt? I don’t want to say that the statement is always nonsens...
Hi Srap. I think W’s position would be that if it doesn’t make sense to doubt it (e.g having a pain), then it doesn’t make sense to say you know it, e...
That’s a funny way to answer a question. Okay, never mind. Edit: in case you missed it, how can one follow the rules (in what one does) if there are n...
I’m fairly sure I know what you mean by this: that it would be brave to claim that any meaning is determinate, or that we can be certain to understand...
There aren't two statements; there is only one. That the one statement has more than one possible meaning is what "ambiguous" means. I don't see how I...
I can't believe you're persisting with this crap. To use an example off the top of my head, if I say "I am going to the bank", then there is potential...
Since any word could be used in an ambiguous way, then all words mean "ambiguous". Right? You're an idiot. Wittgenstein tells us what he means by a pr...
The third is not a possible meaning of "sensation". Additionally, you later said: As such, you have yet to provide any examples of your so-called "mul...
What examples? Where? Quote them. Prove it. Where does he say this? He refers to "S" here twice, which undermines your assertion that he is not talkin...
So you still have no examples to support your claim that the word "sensation" in Wittgenstein's scenario has a "multitude of possible meanings"? At 25...
You claimed that the word "sensation" has a "multitude of possible meanings" in Wittgenstein's scenario. When I asked you to name some of this "multit...
For the last 10 pages or more, we have been discussing whether Wittgenstein's diarist is naming a type or a token of the sensation. Note that these ar...
You hid behind the type/token distinction when I originally asked you this question, and now you're doing it again. Let me get this straight: the "mul...
I'll ask you a third time: name the "multitude of possible meanings" that you think the word "sensation" has in Wittgenstein's scenario. There is "no ...
Yes, it's why I asked you this: You still haven't answered the question. You are claiming both that the meaning of "sensation" is ambiguous and "may b...
I'm not asking about "the same" sensation or types and tokens here. I asked you what you think "sensation" means in Wittgenstein's scenario. How do yo...
Evidently I'm being played for a fool. What different possible meanings do you think "sensation" has in the context of Wittgenstein's scenario? How ca...
You may not have taught me all the things to say, but some person or people did. “It takes a village.” Or, at least, they taught me up to the point wh...
According to your translation, what comes after the question? My explanation obviously didn't take. Try this: First, establish the particular sense/us...
It’s a direct quote. Explain how it’s a misreading. Almost every thing is a multitude of things. The English language is no exception. It depends what...
I don’t believe I ever used the phrase “token of a noun”, but if I did I wasn’t talking about nouns as tokens - which is what I take you to mean by “a...
I said from the outset that I don’t think a proper noun, which refers only to a single entity, makes a type. Because it makes little difference to me,...
Why can a common noun refer to its instances but a proper noun cannot refer to its instance? A proper noun is a noun that is used to refer to a single...
Comments