[lit-ideas] Warnock on "proper"
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 16:57:15 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 6/28/2012 4:53:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
rpaul@xxxxxxxx writes:
Donal writes
> As I am still here trying to explain: without understanding the 'key
> tenet', PI cannot be properly understood. The 'key tenet' is at the back
> of W says: and is fundamental to what W seeks to show.
This implies that I have never 'properly understood' the Philosophical
Investigations (all or in part, apparently). In light of that, my
participation in this discussion is at an end.
----
I think it is Warnock who corrected Austin once:
---- He plays cricket incorrectly.
---- No, he plays cricket inproperly.
Or was it the other way round?
Variations on a theme by D. McEvoy:
>PI cannot be properly understood.
>PI can be improperly understood.
>PI can be understood.
>PI MAY be understood.
>PI may be misunderstood.
>PI may not be improperly misunderstood.
Etc.
Cheers,
Speranza
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
