> [Original Message] > From: Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: 12/6/2005 11:15:13 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Interpretation and Elision > > O woe! how parochial has become our philosophy! Mental states indeed! > What became of the universe in a grain of sand? Of infinite space in a > nutshell? Why the philosophers got hold of it all, that's what. Fie, fie > on philosophy. Give me but a blade of grass and I'll not ask for reasons > why. Never mind that the next time Mount St. Helens blows there might not > be any Sitka spruce left anywhere (assuming it really, really blows, like in > Wow!). And just because Robert Paul can't see the "logical relations > between snow's being white, and my arm's being bent when I touch my nose > with the tip of my finger" doesn't mean there is none, it means merely that > he's still stuck on the elephant's trunk. There are more things, Horatio, > etc., etc. I really do hate philosophers. Have I mentioned that lately? > That goes for you too, Phil Enns, not to mention Mike Chase and Richard > Henninge and all future philosophers such as Erin Holder. Fie on you all. > Talk to me, Andy. > Hey, watch it. I got feelings too you know. Andy Understanding not much of anything > Mike Geary > understanding the universe in Memphis > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Paul" <robert.paul@xxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 9:10 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Interpretation and Elision > > > > Mike Geary wrote: > > > >> Or, expanding on Eric's thought, isn't every statement, perhaps even > >> every thought, an exclusion of the whole truth? > > > > The whole truth about what? he wondered. > > > >> Shouldn't every thought include the universe itself, the universe in > >> which it is nestled and only within which it truly has any meaning? > > > > Some of us think that thoughts are mental events, and that the universe is > > mostly the other kind of stuff, no matter how far out you go. And some > > outlaw band of us thinks that Brentano was right when he noted that mental > > states (including thoughts) are of, or about something. My thought of > > Mount St. Helens is about Mount St. Helens, not about The World's Tallest > > Sitka Spruce. And, even if he wasn't right, we believe that material > > things like those just mentioned are not about anything. (Marx wasn't > > wrong because the true Revolution didn't happen; he was wrong from the > > start, because there are no logical relations between objects and states > > of affairs.) > > > > > Every interpretation carries the baggage of the whole universe. > > > > So, he wondered further how interpretations, which are thoughts, expressed > > in words or other noises carry this baggage, seein' as how it's doubtful > > that there are logical relations between snow's being white, and my arm's > > being bent when I touch my nose with the tip of my finger: I mean, the > > stuff in the universe doesn't carry it?why should my thoughts about and > > interpretations of interpretable things carry it? > > > > Robert Paul > > amazed at the simplicity of it all > > Reed College > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html