[lit-ideas] Where Did Robinson Crusoe Go With Friday On Saturday Night?
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:28:08 -0400 (EDT)
My last post today!
"naively fatuous about language"
McEvoy refers to the private language (that Robinson Crusoe used with
Friday).
Cfr.
_http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Meeting+in+meaning%3A+philosophy+and+theory+i
n+the+work+of+F.R.+Leavis.-a0139587027_
(http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Meeting+in+meaning:+philosophy+and+theory+in+the+work+of+F.R.+Leavis.-a0139587027
)
"[T]he Wittgensteinians ... call the philosophy they are interested in
'linguistic'. Actually they are naively fatuous about language: no exceptions
to my offensive generalization, 'philosophers are always weak on
language.'" (Letter to Eugenio Montale quoted in G. Singh, F.R. Leavis: A
Literary
Biography [London, 1995], 212.) See note 42 below. (I do not think my
discussion is materially affected by the issues raised in the debate between
Norman Malcolm and Baker and Hacker on the distinction between
shared/shareable
language rules [the "Robinson Crusoe" debate].) 39."
In a message dated 9/18/2013 10:53:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx comments on my post on Leavis, as per below.
For the record, some notes on Leavis's adjective, 'fatuous'. He says that
philosophers are 'fatuous about language', which seems like the rightly
fatuous thing to say, seeing that language is often (implicature cancelled: if
not always) fatuous -- or languagers are.
Cheers,
Speranza
(i) Notes on 'fatuous':
fatuous (adj.) c.1600, from Latin fatuus "foolish, insipid, silly;" of
uncertain origin (Buck suggests originally "stricken" in the head). Related:
Fatuously; fatuousness.
fătŭus, a, um, adj. root fa, cf. for; properly, garrulous, I foolish,
silly, simple (class.; syn.: stultus, stolidus, insipiens, desipiens, stupidus,
hebes, ineptus, insulsus, absurdus). I Adj.: ego me ipsum stultum
existimo, fatuum esse non opinor, Afran. ap. Isid. Orig. 10, 246: stulti,
stolidi.
fatui, fungi, bardi, blenni, buccones, Plaut. Bacch. 5, 1, 2: fatuus est,
insulsus, Ter. Eun. 5, 9, 49: non modo nequam et improbus, sed etiam fatuus
et amens es, Cic. Deiot. 7, 21: monitor, id. de Or. 2, 24, 99: homo, Poët.
ap. Cic. de Or. 2, 67, 274: puer, Cic. Att. 6, 6, 3: nisi plane fatui sint,
id. Fin. 2, 22, 70: mores, Plaut. Trin. 2, 2, 18.— B Poet. transf. 1
Insipid, tasteless, of food: ut sapiant fatuae, fabrorum prandia, betae,
Mart. 13, 13.— 2 Awkward, clumsy, unwieldy: illa bipennem Insulsam et
fatuam dextra tenebat, Juv. 6, 658.— II Subst.: fătŭus, i, m., and fătŭa, ae,
f., a fool, simpleton, a jester, buffoon. A In gen., one who acts
foolishly: paene ecfregisti, fatue, foribus cardines, Plaut. Am. 4, 2, 6; Cat.
83,
2; Juv. 9, 8.— B Esp., kept by Romans of rank for their amusement:
Harpasten, uxoris meae fatuam, scis hereditarium onus in domo mea remansisse
... si
quando fatuo delectari volo, me rideo, Sen. Ep. 50, 2; Lampr. Comm. 4, 3.—
Hence, fătŭe, adv., foolishly, absurdly: plerumque studio loquendi fatue
modo accedendum, Quint. 6, 4, 8 dub. (Spald. and Zumpt, fatui); Tert. adv.
Herm. 10; id. de Pat. 6
(ii) McEvoy writes:
"This is a case where we should distinguish Wittgenstein from some
'Wittgensteinians'. Was W ever naively fatuous?"
Well, apparently the etymology (and hence etymythology) for 'fatuous' is
unknown, so how should _I_ know? Short/Lewis, online Latin dictionary, says
that the root for 'fatuous' is 'fa' -- hope that helps.
McEvoy goes on:
"Well, perhaps in some of his political and moral views (including a
naivete about Communist Russia) and perhaps in his understanding of Goedel's
work. But "about language"?"
Or Austrian. For Witters spoke Austrian ("the Austrian engineer"). We
should stop using generalisations like 'lingo' and 'language', and stick to
ACTUAL lingos and dialects. Cfr. note by Popper, "I expect my lingo will be too
Viennese for general understanding" -- paraphrased).
McEvoy:
"Here I have argued the root of his views "about language" is that there
are "limits to language" such that we cannot express those limits in language
but nor can we say in language the sense of language. Now this may be
mistaken or it may be overstating the "limits of language" but it is hardly a
fatuous or naive view."
Or either. But then again, 'fatuous' is perhaps a good word -- if you
_look_ at it in a good way. "naïf" too, for that it's worth. Actually, my
tautologies would be: "fatuous" is fatuous and "naïf" is naïf.
McEvoy:
"If it is true, then for W it will be true of all language - even the most
fatuous or fatuous-looking. It will be true where we use a word to name an
object - i.e. that this 'naming' sense is not said by the words used but
can only be shown. It will be true where the sense of a word depends on some
kind of rule-following - i.e. that the 'rule' here can only be shown not
said, for no 'rule' says its own sense. We should not mistake the fact the W
tries to show his POV in relation to such naive and fatuous cases as
meaning that his view is naive and fatuous."
The source I was referring makes a point, that what the writer says may
relate to the 'rule' argument concerning Robinson Crusoe. Worth checking it
out.
McEvoy concludes:
"Yet there is a school of Wittgensteinians who would take W as offering
something naive and fatuous. For example, they would extract a Private
Language Argument from his work and say that this PLA comes to something like
this
- there are necessarily 'public' 'rules' as to what makes sense "about
language" such that there cannot be a 'private' language in the sense of a
language that has sense without recourse to any 'public' 'rules'. Some,
including Kripkensteinians, then seek to examine what are the grounds for such
'public' rules. Already they are seeking to say more than can be said given
the "limits of language" and, from W's POV, it is not surprising that what
they produce in his name is often nonsense - and naive and fatuous nonsense
to boot."
I'll see if I can retrieve the quote about Robinson Crusoe --
The section is entitled:
"Where did Robinson Crusoe go with Friday on Saturday night?" and is cited
above, as a matter of fact.
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
- » [lit-ideas] Where Did Robinson Crusoe Go With Friday On Saturday Night? - Jlsperanza
