Grice was concerned with a passage by Witters cited by Monk. Witters: "It would have made as little sense for me to say 'Now I am seeing it as...' as to say at the sight of a knife and fork, 'Now I am seeing this as a knife and fork'. Grice argues that Witters lack the 'implicature'. He (Witters) is too ready to say that things don't make sense to him (as the man looking at the sky, his example at the Jowett Society meeting, "and saying, "I think it will rain; therefore I exist") because "he lacked the ability to look for the implicature". As Grice remarks, "Now I am seeing this as a knife and fork', "at the sight of a knife and fork" is perfectly _true_ and sensical, even if perhaps uninformative or trivial qua breach to this or that pragmatic 'conversational maxim' (never 'rule')." Or not. On top of that, as Grice later recollected, Witters was unable to distinguish between "it means" and _I_ mean, and between 'it implies' and "_I_ imply". Witters lacked what Monk calls 'a historical perspective', I think: Monk quotes Witters as saying: "As little philosophy as I have read" (Russell called him an Austrian engineer), "I have ... read... rather too much." Monk: "This attitude would NEVER have been tolerated at Oxford," yet Hacker made part of his career commenting on a non-tolerated figure. Monk continues: "... where respect for things past is in general much stronger than at Cambridge." "It is almost inconceivable", Monk goes on, "that a man" (sexism?) who claimed proudly never to have read a word of Aristotle would have been given ANY TUTORIAL responsibilities at all at Oxford." Or not. Perhaps it _is_ conceivable, if not conceived? Cheers, Speranza ---- "Some like Witters, but Moore's MY man" (overheard by Grice as uttered by J. L. Austin). ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html