Re: Re: Can there be a private language ?
Hi Stephen P. King Yes, I had forgotten about many 1p. And your dismissal of the possibility of a private language is exactly what Witgenstein concluded. Great minds must think alike. Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net 11/5/2012 "Forever is a long time, especially near the end." -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 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). Hi Roger, OK, 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 ?" No, because a language is a conversion of the signification of some set of signs between many communicators. -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
Re: Can there be a private language ? typo!
On 11/5/2012 11:18 AM, Stephen P. King wrote: On 11/5/2012 10:40 AM, Roger Clough wrote: 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). Hi Roger, OK, 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 some set of signs between many communicators. / without mutual agreement and verification or witnessing, there is/are no facts or truths. / / -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
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 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). Hi Roger, OK, 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 ?" No, because a language is a conversion of the signification of some set of signs between many communicators. -- Onward! Stephen -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
