[Wittrs] Re: Language games, html, and the Varieties of Nonsense

  • From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 20:42:45 -0700 (PDT)

On reflection, Walter, you might want to consider the following:

1. If your 11-year old had been studying Court decisions for years (at a level 
well beyond her age), had been a believer (and practitioner) in them early on, 
had discovered a criticism of them from the most intelligent mind of our age, 
and had been intelligent enough herself to absorb that criticism -- it might 
then be a good comparison if she declared no further need to read them. Is 
it condescension to point out a poor comparison? What are the rules for that?   

2. Do you realize that your contributions with me in this thread amount to the 
following:

(a)..You said my view was Carnapian  (i.e, you didn't understand);
(b). You thought I had called people "retarded" (again, didn't understand)
(c) You claimed I didn't know what I was talking about (sophistry)
(d) You avoided an invite to discuss the matter in some detail 
(e) You take your usual personal swipes 
(f) You trash quote on purpose 
(g) you offer up the church-club ethic, yet have more blood on your fangs than 
anyone ever could. 

This is a Wittgenseinian list. And I think you have to understand that 
Wittgensteinians tend not to care that people dislike intellectual arrogance, 
especially where one hasn't yet shown any promise to discuss the ethics of it. 
The point of this list isn't for you to "hit and run" like you do on Analytic. 
Every time a person besmirches philosophy with arrogance, your role isn't to 
butt in with (a) through (g). That's not why this is here.

So how about either thinking more about what you want to say? 

Regards and thanks.

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
Wittgenstein Discussion: http://seanwilson.org/wiki/doku.php?id=wittrs

Other related posts: