[lit-ideas] Re: Everything Old Is New Again

  • From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Jlsperanza" for DMARC)
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 08:29:49 -0500

McEvoy might have been confused by my rather stupid subject line,
"Everything Old Is New Again": a response to his challenging remark that
"Wittgensteinians" differ too much among themselves to have any family
resemblance to
the Vienese genius that went by that surname, "Wittgenstein".

But the point of my post, if it had one, is that Witters COULD have replied
Sraffa's question.

In a message dated 11/25/2015 8:33:25 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx was quoting directly from Malcolm's Memoir:

"Sraffa made a gesture, familiar to Neapolitans as meaning something like
disgust or contempt, of brushing the underneath of his chin with an
sweep of the finger-tips of one hand. And he asked: 'What is the logical
form of that?'"

The logical form was

i. Sraffa is disgusted by Witters.

At least according to Malcolm's paraphrase!

I mean, what would be the good of a gesture (even if Neapolitan -- knowing
Neapolitans use one gesture too many) if it does not display some sort of
'sense' or 'logical form' expressible in a propositional format. Witters
ignored that, either intentionally, or not!

Had he responded in the common-sense manner, "The gesture means you are
disgusted by me; hence its logical form", he could have saved us from the
"Philosophical Investigations"! (Just joking, I love reviewing that book!)




Strawson, P. F. Review of Witters, "Philosophical Investigations."
Smith, Sidney, "I never read a book before reviewing it; it prejudices a
man so!" -- Diaries.

To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: