[C] [Wittrs] Re: Re: Language as a Set of Cue Cards
- From: kirby urner <kirby.urner@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 17:23:49 -0800
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ... I don't mean cue cards as in the sense of television (having words). I
> mean the idea of cue in a social science sense. The idea of "cue"
> is of symbol or sign that prompts its receiver. Instead of playing Jacks, one
> plays the game of prompt. Just as in real card games where certain cards do
> more licentious things, there are cue cards that have special value. The face
> cards "pin" something particular. The ordinary cards only prompt for
> resemblance. When one assembles a "hand" and plays it, so to speak, one can
> offer a terrible play or perhaps be a terrible player (which is only to say
> that one is challenged by insight).
>
> Regards.
>
> SW
I've been meditating (or was it cogitating? -- I should introspect and
find out (smirky smile)) on this metaphor.
Interesting spin on "cue" (thinking "cue ball" or "cue stick").
My first thought was of that joke about the prisoners, where they've
told the jokes enough to give them all numbers, and now just say the
numbers and laugh just the same. How "private language" is that?
The ability to read cues implies a foreground and background, and
meaning, per PI Part 2, is not just about investigating usage
patterns, it's about developing a kind of depth perception, a
sensitivity to grammars (which come and go -- you can watch them
forming, like bubbles).
What does it mean to "follow the action"? That's somewhat required if
one's to espouse about rules and/or defend one's having followed them.
A referee catches errors, faults, misbehaviors, in the context of
knowing what to look for (what the rules are). Likewise in debate,
the judges look for the fallacies, the sleights of hand.
The repeated re-appearance of the cue cards, as if in a tapestry or
intricate machine, sets up all these differences and their grammatical
roles, a form of life, a world (some more magical).
If we're immersed in it long enough, we have opportunities to participate.
Wittgenstein is quite clear however that this is not guaranteed, i.e.
there's always that possibility of being with people one can't find
one's feet with, of being with people one is out of one's depth with.
That would be akin to not being able to pick up on cues, to manifest
an inability to understand. Such is life in the big city, maybe
better luck down the street?
Kirby
--
>>> from mars import math
http://www.wikieducator.org/Martian_Math
=========================================
Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
- » [C] [Wittrs] Re: Re: Language as a Set of Cue Cards - kirby urner
