[Wittrs] Re: The language game of html, again.
- From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:13:51 -0700 (PDT)
(re: Stuart)
... it isn't a "technical concern." Using a bracket would have suggested an
arithmetic (an order of operations). It's fundamentally a creative and artistic
behavior -- a new addition in the language game. It's a learned activity from
the phenomenon of scripting (web pages, I assume). The behavior of scripting is
entering our language gems because it is proving itself useful. Imagine the
number of people who are now very familiar with seeing the difference between
WYSIWYG and the underlying <html> that produces it (say, in their blog
editors).
Or those who read a web page and click "view source code." Take a look at the
two pages:
an original: http://www.poliscijobrumors.com/topic.php?id=43864&page=2
the
source: view-source:http://www.poliscijobrumors.com/topic.php?id=43864&page=2
Now, apply this to speech acts. Whereas, before, one had the parenthesis to
notate more intimate suggestions, one now has a better notation in play for a
sort of underlying process. One might call it "the poetry of signs."
The only reason <sigh> enters the language game is because the learned
orientation of programming languages is interacting beneficially with other
culturally acquired activities (i.e., language). Wittgenstein would have
instantly seen this maneuver as evidence of what his entire observations were
all about. One could see, e,g., an entry in his notebook inquiring what it
means
to say <sigh> after one had learnt certain computer markup, as opposed to those
not familiar with the markup (how do they take it). Indeed, doesn't the vehicle
of the the "html tag marks" provide a better symbolism for the sense of "sigh"
we so often mean?
It would be like saying this. Imagine the very first time that a thought-bubble
was created in comics or what not. Surely, somewhere, there is a first of
sorts.
Imagine someone seeing the thing for first time and "getting it." Once the
exchange is successful and useful, the language market has another trading
vehicle. Look how successful the thought-bubble is at what it does.
What would come along in culture to have us change that notation?
Philosophy is about insight, Stuart. The ones who debate "free will" and all
the
other false problems tend not to be able to see the lights that make these
disputes "false." What I want to say is this: if there is no artistic skills
used by the person in the forming of ideas -- if all he or she has is summing
ducks or scoring premises -- the matter is not given over to "philosophy"
properly conceived.
There really is no difference between the VEHICLE philosophy uses when it is
properly conceived, and, e.g., the vehicle used by Psalms. Only the ones of
certain lights see the wisdom more clearly (quickly). And what the mission of
club is, is for those to explain to others that which they cannot see. To try
to
raise them, as it were, to abnormal heights. The hope is, of course, that some
benefit comes of this, and not that the water simply retrenches into the same
level of reservoir as before.
Those who cannot see the lights, Stuart, occupy their days with disputes over
"free will."
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:
