[Wittrs] Re: Wittgenstein's meaning is use.
- From: "BruceD" <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 00:23:39 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, CJ <wittrs@...> wrote:
> The "use" of which it makes sense to speak is NOT the personalized,
> incipient about-to-be expressed flicker of a word, but is the role
> that the expression or word fills in the playing of the language game
> of which it is a an aspect and part, how it helps hold the game
> together and how it enables that game to reside firmly and solidly in
> an underlying 'Form of life".
Given the above definition, why isn't it in accord with LW's use of use
to point out that the role of of the "incipient about-to-be expressed"
is also that which "holds the game together"....etc.
In short, if the meaning of our words is in the use, what uses can be
illegitimate?
bruce
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:
