From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Wed Nov 13 2002 - 08:20:33 GMT
Hi Scott,
I think we are in substantial agreement: I particularly agree that the
understanding of intellect (or Reason) has been impoverished since the early
modern period, especially since Locke.
However, I'm intrigued by your proposed shift, viz: you are"concerned with
what I consider to be the basic work of philosophy, namely *changing* the
way we understand key words".
That's a very anti-Wittgensteinian approach (which doesn't make it wrong, of
course). He would argue that bringing philosophy into everyday language is
the source of all our confusions; that the words are working fine just as
they are (until the philosophers start talking); and that, if we want to
ease our confusions, what we need is to examine how words are used in their
everyday context, and that will ease our troubles. To use his image, it will
'show the fly the way out of the fly bottle', and stop us being worried by
its buzzing.
How would you understand the fourth level?
Sam
www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.html
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 13 2002 - 08:18:54 GMT