Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [Sartre] Digest Number 1517

Expand Messages
  • mt
    ... From: Sartre@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Sartre@yahoogroups.com] Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 3:17 PM To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com Subject: [Sartre] Digest
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Sartre@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Sartre@yahoogroups.com]
      Sent: Monday, January 02, 2006 3:17 PM
      To: Sartre@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: [Sartre] Digest Number 1517

      There is 1 message in this issue.

      Topics in this digest:

      1. Re: analytic and continental thinking
      From: "theoryphil2004" <theoryphil2004@...>


      Message: 1
      Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 22:11:22 -0000
      From: "theoryphil2004" <theoryphil2004@...>
      Subject: Re: analytic and continental thinking

      --- In Sartre@yahoogroups.com, "scarey1917" <scarey1917@y...> wrote:
      > The point was that in the "Tractatus" the intending and living
      > character of thought was not developed, so for all that it mattered
      > that book could be describing the functioning of a computer
      > representing a state of the world. "What is this 'thought' that
      arrives mysteriously to give significance to the porposition, to apply
      it, and to get expressed through it?. . . Wittgenstein never
      adequately explains it. . . thought in a non-behaviourist sense must
      be present to use the proposition or sentence if the sign is to
      signify. For it is really this that refers, this that corresponds,. .
      . Unfortunately it is precisely this that is an alien in
      Wittgenstein's world,. . . "
      > ("Reason and Analysis", p. 154).

      Thankyou for answering my question with a more detailed quote Scarey.
      I appreciate the time taken to respond. Unfortunately I am still at a
      bit of a loss to see what the critique is meant to be. It seems that
      Blanshard is able to talk about two things: the thought and the
      proposition. Yet my understanding of the Tractatus is that the
      proposition is the thought (at least the part of the thought that is
      relevant to its truth or falsity). So prima facie (I have not read any
      of what Blanshard wrote) it seems that Blanshard's attempted critique
      rests on a confused understanding of the Tractatus. Of course
      Blanshard may have a better understanding of the Tractatus than I do,
      but this bit of interpretation seems pretty clear to me and fits in
      with the influence of Frege that is relevant to reading the Tractatus.

      Maybe Blanshard meant "belief" rather than "thought" or that an
      alternative model of what a thought is undermines the model invoked in
      the Tractatus. I don't know. I am guessing here, so would need some
      more elaboration of Blanshard's view. But so far I can't make out what
      his critique is.


      P.S. The reference to computers and information science and early
      analytic philosophy are red herrings. In fact the opposite would be
      more appropriate.

      > <<<<<<"theoryphil2004"wrote: What does this mean??>>>>>>>>
      > <<<<<<I think you would like Blanshard's critique; he argues that
      > early) Analytic approach to language (the "picturing" theory)
      > abstracted from the consideration of living thought as the true
      > intending agency.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


      To unsubscribe, e-mail: Sartre-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      Yahoo! Groups Links

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.