[Wittrs] Re: Private Language Argument
- From: kirby urner <kirby.urner@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 14:45:05 -0700
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 1:55 PM, brendan downs
<downs_brendan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> If we follow arguments from the 3 great Empiricists Locke-(ideaism),
> Berekely-(Idealism) and Hume(solipism) we arrive at the private language
> argument i.e In order to tell if someone understands a word or phrase, one
> looks to behaviour. If someone were to behave as if they understood a
> language which no-one else can make sense of, we might call this an example
> of a private language. From the position of solipism(The only mind that
> exists is my own) I can only assert that others have a mind by looking to
> ones behaviour, as in they show intelligent behaviour i.e behave as they
> understand a language. This is an argument by analogy, I compare my behavior
> to someone else. This is not a deductive or inductive argument but an
> argument that takes the form "inference to the best explanation". From an IBE
> no premise can be asserted to be true or false because only propositions have
> the property of being true or false, explaintions can only be good or bad. So
> it makes no sense to assert
> that private argument is either true or false.
>
> Brendan
It's important not to turn Wittgenstein into some crass behaviorist
who thinks you need a lot of behavior to prove a given person is in
pain. Sometimes you don't get to see a person at all, yet you know
something about what happened and you know this entails pain. This
idea that we're always trying to ascertain whether someone is in pain
or not, by closely observing their behavior, is quite apropos in some
situations, I would never dispute that, but in many other
circumstances, nothing of the sort is required.
What may also happen is most of those in a room can detect that
so-and-so is in psychological pain, based on tone of voice, facial
expressions, but said individual doesn't acknowledge feeling wounded
or hurt, is actually doing his or her best to conceal any such
feelings, even from him or herself. We could call this being in
denial about one's pain. Yes, behavior is involved, but the grammar
has changed in that you're not treating an individual as the one true
authority in the room about what she or he is subjectively
experiencing. It's important to remember these cases lest we
oversimplify and suggest there's only one cut and dried way of
talking, such that whoever says they're in pain has the final word on
the matter.
Kirby
WEB VIEW: http://tinyurl.com/ku7ga4
TODAY: http://alturl.com/whcf
3 DAYS: http://alturl.com/d9vz
1 WEEK: http://alturl.com/yeza
GOOGLE: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
YAHOO: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/
FREELIST: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
Other related posts:
