[lit-ideas] Grice's Bootstrap

From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 21:41:46 -0400 (EDT)
In a message dated 3/20/2012 10:34:49 A.M. UTC-02,  
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx quotes from Russell:

"Mr Wittgenstein manages to say a 
good deal about what cannot be said, 
thus suggesting to the sceptical reader 
that possibly there may 
be some loophole through 
a 
 
hierarchy of languages, 
 
or by some other exit."
 
I relate this to Grice -- his bootstrap. Grice writes is considering  
considering a 'fine distinction' concerning levels of conceptual priority: 
 
"It is perhaps reasonable to regard such fine distinction as indispensable  
if we are to succeed in the business of 
pulling ourselves up by our own bootstraps."

Grice adds:
 
"In this connection it will be relevant for me to say that 

I once invented (though I did not establish its validity) a 
 
principle which I labelled as Boostrap."

Grice goes on:
 
"The principle laid down that: 
 
when one is introducing the primitive concepts of a theory formulated
in  an object-language, one has freedom to use any battery of concepts 
expressible  in the meta-language, subject to the condition that counterparts 
of 
such  concepts are subsequently definable or otherwise 
derivable in the  object-language. 
 
So, 
 
the more economically one introduces the primitive object-language  
concepts, the less of a task one leaves oneself for the morrow."
 
This may relate to Witters's paradox of 'saying/showing' that  McEvoy is 
considering. Note that Russell mentions this 'hierarchy of languages'  dis
playing a loophole. Or something like that.

Cheers,
 
Speranza 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
[lit-ideas] Grice's Bootstrap

Other related posts:
