[lit-ideas] Re: Grice's Realm

  • From: Donal McEvoy <donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: "lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 20:20:29 +0100 (BST)




________________________________
 From: "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx>


>When I, rather presumptuously, used 'uninterestingly' to refer to what  
Popper did to Frege's realms (Frege's 'third realm' becomes Popper's "world 3", 
but Frege's first realm becomes Popper's "world 2") I was being facetious. 
For,  interestingly, indeed Frege's numbering reflects some sort of 
empiricism  (psychologism, even) on his part.>

Surely more facetious comment is that Popper is a surprising advocate for the 
Third Reich or that Sting's "One World (Not Three)" is as decisive a refutation 
of Popper's W123 theory as might be conceived using the forces of bleached 
blonde hair, white reggae and a mild rock backbeat.

>While this may have to do little with Grice's Realm, my point was indeed  
that Frege's three realms (or Popper's three worlds for that matter) 
eventually  subsume, under a 'naturalistic' scheme like Grice into "one" -- the 
one 
and only  realm, which I call Grice's realm.>

This keeps coming up - Popper is not saying there are three universes: his 
"Worlds" terminology is more akin to when we speak of the world of art or the 
world of science or of politics or of music or of fashion - or the world of 
thoughts as opposed to world of sensations, or the world of mind as opposed to 
the world of matter. The three Worlds are levels or realms within one universe, 
as is indicated by the fact they interact within that one universe. But there 
are levels within these levels/realms and the terminology of Worlds is meant to 
bring out that there is something of a seismic development when we move, albeit 
perhaps gradually, from one such World to another. [Albeit, the development of 
life from non-living matter within World 1 is also a seismic development.]


Donal

Other related posts: