[lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 23:15:29 -0500
WO:
> Given the prevalence of this expression [like] amongst my students in Canada,
> the
> US and the UK, I have repeatedly attempted to deconstruct its meaning. My
> tentative conclusion is that the expression serves a particular psychological
> and social function: it distances the speaker from an explicit and direct
> affirmation of the accuracy or truth of the utterance, and, thus, it mitigates
> any responsibility the speaker may have for redeeming/justifying the truth or
> rightness of the claim.
You wish. "Like" has all the meaning of "uh". Pure filler. It functions like
in "you know?" Like it serves as a kind of -- um, you know, like, a breath
gap. Not everything is reducible to philosophy, Walter. Some things preserve
their like, you know, um, uh, hmm, purity of unmeaning despite all or
cognitions..
> The most systematic explication of the "like" phenomenon in social and
> political
> contexts, is provided in John Rawls's "Political Liberalism." Like, you know
> what I mean? No claims of substantive truth or rightness are involved.
Well, uh, hmm, I guess I'm like going to have to go with Rawls here. It's all
just made up as far as I can tell. Truth is just a wild ass guess. But some
of the made up makes more sense than other made up does -- at least according
to my make up of make ups. In other words, I don't believe in revelation.
Mike Geary
Memphis
for sure
----- Original Message -----
From: <wokshevs@xxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "David Ritchie" <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 1:47 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
> Quoting David Ritchie <ritchierd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>> Paradox that occurred to me while walking:
>
> WO: Was the paradox that dawned upon you that you could never possibly arrive
> at
> your destination and yet you did? If so, beware of the giggling milkmaids.
> (They may take you in.)
>
>
>> the generation
>> characterized by over-use of "like" struggles when asked to formulate
>> comparative statements for analytical purposes.
>
> WO: Given the prevalence of this expression amongst my students in Canada, the
> US and the UK, I have repeatedly attempted to deconstruct its meaning. My
> tentative conclusion is that the expression serves a particular psychological
> and social function: it distances the speaker from an explicit and direct
> affirmation of the accuracy or truth of the utterance, and, thus, it mitigates
> any responsibility the speaker may have for redeeming/justifying the truth or
> rightness of the claim. ("Hey, I'm just talkin'. Like, what, I'm supposed to
> always know why I believe what I believe? Or, like, I gotta be able to prove
> to
> you that anything I says is right really is right? Like, who the hell are you
> anyway? An what is "really right," like, really anyway. Who are you, anyways,
> God? John Rawls??
>
> On this theory, when it is said - "So when she told me that I failed my test,
> I
> felt, like, how could I fail that test?!" - the "like" serves to qualify the
> validity of the response and signals to others that any perception by them of
> the speaker's certainty of the truth or rightness of the sentence uttered is
> inappropriate and misplaced. The speaker thus shields herself from others'
> queries regarding any final validity of her claim since she is not expressedly
> claiming the claim as presented/uttered. It's only "like" I'm claiming the
> claim, but not really - like, you know what I mean? (Yes, things get to be
> recursive, after awhile.)
>
> The most systematic explication of the "like" phenomenon in social and
> political
> contexts, is provided in John Rawls's "Political Liberalism." Like, you know
> what I mean? No claims of substantive truth or rightness are involved.
>
> Like, Walter O.
> MUN
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> David Ritchie,
>> Portland, Oregon
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
- References:
- [lit-ideas] None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Mike Geary
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Ursula Stange
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Mike Geary
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Veronica Caley
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Ursula Stange
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Veronica Caley
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Eric Yost
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: David Ritchie
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- » [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- [lit-ideas] None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Mike Geary
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Ursula Stange
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Mike Geary
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Veronica Caley
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Ursula Stange
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Veronica Caley
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: Eric Yost
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: David Ritchie
- [lit-ideas] Re: None Dare Call It Reason
- From: wokshevs