Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
Attention: Starting December 14, 2019 Yahoo Groups will no longer host user created content on its sites. New content can no longer be uploaded after October 28, 2019. Sending/Receiving email functionality is not going away, you can continue to communicate via any email client with your group members. Learn More

6Re: [Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science] Thoughts on how to talk in this discussion group

Expand Messages
  • Robert Parr
    Nov 8, 2005
      Re: [Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science] Thoughts on how to talk in this discussion group John,

      A most important point when talking about when talking about Wittgenstein’s work.  One commentator wrote that he used
      Ordinary language but he used it with great precision. Once a member of PSL said an important word used by Wittgenstein
      could be used the way he understood it.  My thought was, who cares.  We aren’t like Humpty Dumpty in Through the Looking
      Glass.  
      “’When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in a scornful tone, ‘it means what I choose it to mean---neither more nor less.”

      Everyday conversation is filled with words that mean different things to different persons.  Not all words need to be  precise;
      most in fact are not----with no loss in their ability to be used in communication.  But in some words, especially words like ‘thinking’,
      ‘believing’, ‘understanding’, ‘meaning’ in itself, require conceptual clarification.  Much of Wittgenstein’s writing revolves around such
      words.  What you mean when using such words, is probably the  least important form of “meaning”.

      So, yes, we need to pay attention to our actual use of language.  Whoever joins this group will be part of a particular community of language users.  In discussions and in our use, even though we are a subset of the whole community, we will be evolving the type of
      language we require to investigate topics we focus on.

      PARR


      On 11/8/05 3:05 PM, "John Schmidt" <mindbrainsoul@...> wrote:

      --- In Wittgentein-Language_Mathematics_and_Science@yahoogroups.com,
      Robert Parr <robparrl@k...> wrote:
      >
      > we have a lot in
      > common, but we don't talk in lock step

      [JWS] I'd get real worried if I ever found someone who agreed with me
      on everything. Some of the views I champion get my verbal support just
      because I think it is important to always have more than one way of
      looking at things.

      [old JWS] "These kinds of understandings between different types of
      people as being fundamentally dependent on how we use language."

      [JWS] Sorry about that sentence (above), from my previous post to this
      group. That sentence was once coherent and then I started to modify it
      and then I forgot to finish the change. I wanted to suggest that we
      must be careful in how we use language when we engage in the important
      work trying to bring together people who have different views of a
      topic. All too often the different ways we use words can drive us
      apart, particularly when we come from different backgrounds. I hope
      that members of this discussion group work towards mutual
      understanding rather than try to win debate points.

      -John Schmidt






       
       

      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


       



    • Show all 5 messages in this topic