Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- From: "Rupert" <rupertmccallum@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Dec 2006 02:35:42 -0800
aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Rupert wrote:
It seems to me we need to give an account of the nature of the
connection between the sentence token and the mental events that take
place when asserting it. I am reminded of Wittgenstein's
thought-experiment: Say "It's warm in here" and mean "It's cold in
here".
But the whole point of such thought-experiments was to show that
meaning something by something does not consist in some mental act.
True. I recently bought a book called "A Spectical Guide to Meaning and
Rules: Defending Kripke's Wittgenstein." It defends the "meaning
scepticism" attributed by Kripke to Wittgenstein in "Wittgenstein on
Rules and Private Language". I remember reading a discussion
Wittgenstein had with Turing in which he was rather dismissive of the
problem posed by the liar paradox. But it seems to me it is worthwhile
to try and get clearer about the puzzle posed by the strengthened liar.
I'm not sure how you would do that under an assumption of meaning
scepticism.
--
Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xxxxxxxxx)
"Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, daruber muss man schweigen"
- Ludwig Wittgenstein, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- From: aatu . koskensilta
- Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- References:
- PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- From: LauLuna
- Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- From: Rupert
- Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- From: aatu . koskensilta
- PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- Prev by Date: Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- Next by Date: Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- Previous by thread: Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- Next by thread: Re: PARADOXES AND STATES OF AFFAIRS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|