[Wittrs] Re: Wittgenstein's meaning is use.
- From: Glen Sizemore <gmsizemore2@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 14:32:20 -0700 (PDT)
--- On Wed, 9/30/09, BruceD <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> From: BruceD <blroadies@xxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [Wittrs] Re: Wittgenstein's meaning is use.
> To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Wednesday, September 30, 2009, 9:49 PM
>
> --- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> CJ <wittrs@...> wrote:
> >
> > From Wittgenstein
> >
> > When I think in language, there aren't 'meanings'
> going through my
> > mind in addition to the verbal expressions: the
> language is itself the
> > vehicle of thought.
>
> Is this an empirical discovery?
Of course not.
>Is it a claim to knowledge?
What does THIS mean?
> Can it be
> true or false?
I'm not sure that this is a meaningful question. If it is nonsense to say that
"utterances express meanings" - and if one looks at how "meaning" is used, it
becomes obvious that it is - then why would it not be nonsense when the
utterances are observable only to the speaker and listener who, in this case,
are the same person?
>Perhaps it is true for some folks and not
> others, some
> cultures....or is this statement of our esssence?
It is a question concerning the meaning of "meaning."
>
> It is the status of these remarks that concern me.
And now you know.
==========================================
For all your Wittrs needs: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
