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

  • From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 10:13:58 -0700 (PDT)

(re: Walter)

... yes, but, as you say, Carnap's view was "proven wrong." So in comparing the 
difference between this and Wittgensteinianism we would now need to know more 
about: (a) your sense of "brilliance;" and (b) whether the ethic of humility is 
good or bad here. Is this an ethic that advances the ordinary? What if 
Wittgensteininans advance an ethic of sincerity and honesty over everything 
else? Is the selection of one over the other like the selection one might make 
of ice cream, or is it, perhaps, an issue of pedagogy (of how to tell things - 
honestly and directly, or "with sugar")?  
 
P.S. The claim isn't that anyone is "retarded;" it's that they are confused, 
and, perhaps, not that insightful. Plenty of people lack insight like others 
lack mathematical ability. Or others still, spelling abilities (and what not). 
The issue here is really akin to whether one is a good artist. It's the same 
sort of thing.

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




----- Original Message ----
From: walto <walterhorn@xxxxxxxxx>
To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, April 16, 2011 12:42:11 PM
Subject: [Wittrs] Re: Language games, html, and the Varieties of Nonsense

Main differences from Carnap:

1) Carnap had a very solid understanding about what philosophy was and how it 
worked, before saying it was largely nonsense.

2) Carnap had some humility, and did not suggest that people he disagreed with 
were either retarded or insane or both or they would see that he was correct.

3) Carnap was brilliant.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. wittrsamr
  3. Archive
  4. 04-2011