ot; -Woody Allen
- Receiving the following content -
From: Stephen P. King
Receiver: everything-list
Time: 2012-11-05, 11:18:48
Subject: Re: Can there be a private language ?
On 11/5/2012 10:40 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
> Hi Stephen P. King
>
> You could see it that wa
, but isn't the "objectivity" of 3p exactly what many 1p could
agree upon and nothing more?
Which raises Wittgenstein's question, "Can there be a
private language ?"
TYPO fixed
No, because a language is /a language is a _*convention*_ of the
signification of
3p exactly what many 1p could
agree upon and nothing more?
Which raises Wittgenstein's question, "Can there be a
private language ?"
No, because a language is a conversion of the signification of some
set of signs between many communicators.
--
Onward!
Stephen
--
You rec
Hi Stephen P. King
You could see it that way, but I only meant that 1p is subjective
(as I see or know it (here,now)) while 3p is objective (as they
see or know whatever, whenever).
Which raises Wittgenstein's question, "Can there be a
private language ?"
Roger Clough, rclo
4 matches
Mail list logo
