[lit-ideas] "The Life and Death of Wittgenstein"
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 09:22:03 EDT
In a message dated 5/15/2009 8:51:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
There is a process between an entity being alive and it being dead which
we call "dying" - insofar as "death" refers to this process P2 is false
again: for clearly people do experience, indeed most consciously sometimes,
the
process of dying.
----
McEvoy thinks he has refuted Wittgenstein.
We are considering:
"Death is what happens to you when you're busy making other plans"
Other than "dying" I assume.
In the original:
"Life is what happens to you when you're busy making other plans"
IMPLICATURE: Other than _living_. Meaning: You stupid git.
With "Death" as 'subject' the implicature becomes so bland that I fail to
retrieve it.
We lack the German here:
Wittgenstein possibly said:
"Tod ist kein Event der Liebe. Wir lieben nicht zu tod-experimenten"
I have to check this above.
---
Yes, he is having Socrates in mind. Only a rich German can mention
Socrates in a booklet and get his D.Phil from Cambridge for it!
-----
I have _not_ seen but _trailers_ of Derek Jarman's _Wittgenstein_. The
trailers I saw looked dark and boring and focused on his experiencing dying,
therefore rendering the whole Tractatus unimaginable.
He died of cancer (to the brain?).
-----
McEvoy:
"There is a process between an entity being alive and it being dead which
we call "dying" - insofar as "death" refers to this process P2 is false
again: for clearly people do experience, indeed most consciously sometimes,
the
process of dying."
Well, yes. In "Actions and Events" (PPQ, 1988) Grice applies Von Wright's
logic of events
p1 / p2
p1 and then p2.
A _process_ or event is a time-consuming fact. But Grice's examples are
from Roman history:
"The death of Julius Caesar"
etc.
----
The last phrase of the Quixote, as I recall, Borges found funny.
"And then, the old man, as Quixote then was, gave up
his spirit, that is to say, he died."
----
But we do make a distinction:
A: How is your friend, the Austrian engineer.
B: He died. Didn't you know?
A: You don't say.
B: Cancer. In Switzerland.
----
This above makes sense only when "Queen Anne is dead" IS news. Consider a
different scenario:
A: You keep quoting Wittgenstein. But this is
a nursing class. And your midterm practicum
as not so brilliant. Indeed you failed in it.
B: Yes, for Wittgenstein, death is not an event of life
A: And why don't you next bring your Wittgenstein here.
He may help you with your grades.
B: He's dead.
--
In the above, "He died" does not make sense. Yet, I don't see a
truth-conditional distinction between 'He is dead' and 'he died'. The
distinction is
merely implicatural.
----
While we loosely can say, "He is experiencing death", in fact he is not. He
is experiencing the last moments of his life. Death is defined as
non-experience. In old English people used 'agony' for that. But now they are
very
loose about it.
The other day my mother picked up the phone in Argentina; a friend from
England was calling.
SHE: And how is your health?
HE: Oh, I'm in agony.
She actually thought the man _was_ dying. "Agony" is used hyperbolically
for things like "my right arm itches" now.
The crux of the argument is in Zeno Vendler. He analyses verbs. Consider
'die'. What kind of verb is it. He says, "it's an achievement verb".
Cheers,
JL Speranza
Bordighera, etc.
**************Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in
the U.S.
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav00000002)
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
