[lit-ideas] Re: Language, Justice and Social Practices (long)

  • From: Eric Yost <mr.eric.yost@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 16:12:50 -0400

Phil: Eric assumes a sufficient description of the concept of 'pawn' but it isn't at all clear that there can be such a description because there is no way of determining which use of the word is sufficient. The name 'pawn', or its equivalent, is not simply a flag for a concept but rather a necessary part of understanding the concept.

Eric: Does it make sense to say that within the game of chess, there are constituent concepts, and the possible moves of the pieces on the second rank form one concept? And that this concept can be grasped without naming those pieces on the second rank? Or is the very act of referring to "pieces on the second rank" a form of naming-by-location? What do you think?

Further, I'm not sure I understand what Phil means by assigning an external, cultural significance to "pawn." If every time I promote a pawn, I get a million dollars, that's either (a) outside of the game of chess, or (b) a local redefinition of the game of chess into some other game.

------------------------------------------------------------------
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:

  1. Home
  2. lit-ideas
  3. Archive
  4. 09-2005