Re: [Wittrs] New Book on Wittgenstein and Constitutional Theory
- From: "seanwilsonorg" <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Wittgenstein's Aftermath <wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 04:55:20 -0000
... I see your point, Han, and I beg your forgiveness for not catching it
earlier. I would agree with you wholeheartedly that grammar is dynamic and
never static. There's a nice discussion about that in my book, but it concerns
legal scholars who, when invoking Wittgenstein's name, didn't appear to catch
that point.
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Han Geurdes <wittrs@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Sean
>
> Thanks for your kind words. To me it works the other way around. Most of
> the things you write contain very interesting material.
>
> I am also not sure. Perhaps I read it in the Blue Book. I thought
> Wittgenstein somewhere wrote on 'making the rules while playing the game'.
> Hence, not following a rule but making one whie playing.
>
> It is in the nature of a (language) game to have rules. But when one starts
> -when is that?- there might be no rules -or a set of rules from another
> game-. The game grows and the rules grow with them.
>
> E.g. I do enjoy and deeply respect physics. I am proud to be able to
> contribute. However, why is mathematics so succesful in explaining physical
> phenomena? I think Wigner also asked this question.
>
> A Wittgensteinian answer *could* be that the (science) game grew over the
> years and the rules (mathematics) grew with it.
>
> Of course we could also think that nature has a mathematical structure but
> is that a fact? How can we know that?
>
> Best,
> Han
>
>
>
>
> On 18 September 2012 20:56, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
>
> > Hi Han.
> >
> > Good to hear from you, as always.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by "making the rules as we go up." My book
> > applies a wide array of Wittgenstein's ideas to the question of what a
> > constitution means. I rely upon his views on language meaning, artisan
> > judgments ("aesthetics"), aspect seeing, imponderable evidence, private
> > language and assertability conditions (grammar). I don't think I have one
> > of the so called "rule following passages" of Philosophical Investigations
> > cited, but I could be wrong about that. I do, however, have what I have
> > always considered to be a very important chapter in the book -- Chapter 2
> > -- on how to follow a flexible rule. Based on the private feedback I've
> > received on the book, however, people are not high on that chapter. I
> > really like it because I think it clarifies the way both Dworkin and
> > political scientists think about how this kind of statement can be
> > "followed:" No State Shall Deny Equal Protection to its citizens.
> >
> > Anyway, always glad to see that you'd find anything I write to be even
> > close to interesting, even as a topic.
> >
> > Regards and thanks.
> >
> > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
> > Assistant Professor
> > Wright State University
> > Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
> > My New Book: http://flexibleconstitution.squarespace.com/
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wittrs mailing list
> > Wittrs@...
> > http://undergroundwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/wittrs_undergroundwiki.org
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> <http://undergroundwiki.org/pipermail/wittrs_undergroundwiki.org/attachments/20120919/938fe96a/attachment.htm>
> _______________________________________________
> Wittrs mailing list
> Wittrs@...
> http://undergroundwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/wittrs_undergroundwiki.org
>
_______________________________________________
Wittrs mailing list
Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://undergroundwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/wittrs_undergroundwiki.org
Other related posts:
