As a person with math background you might ask this question of that discipline as well. Every day about 80 articles are submitted to ArXiv.org . There are probably tens of thousands of articles published that are read by less than five people and have not garnered enough support to move the needle of mathematical desire.
To this extent most mathematics and philosophy have little to no effect on the twists and turns of civilization. But there is a kind of satisfaction to the individual producing their product. — jgill
Still, it seems to me like meaning is in some ways constructed too. — Count Timothy von Icarus
t seems like different, quite independent systems get used for processing different aspects of language. — Count Timothy von Icarus
So, it seems like the recipient "brings something to the table." — Count Timothy von Icarus
Language is an evolved capacity that itself evolves. It is used to do many different types of things — Count Timothy von Icarus
Sure, and I think there are deconstruction-adjacent forms of literary criticism that dissolve the creative personality into a mere thermostat of their time -- ignoring that their own criticism becomes equally 'irrational' --a mere blinking light on the history machine -- thereby. — plaque flag
Language leads to the co-construction of our private and public realms. Society needs language to shape us, and we need language to shape our societies.
That two-way focusing effect of speech acts is what Anglo thought in particular tends to miss. It is absent from mainstream cognitive psychology, neurolinguistics and evolutionary psychology even. — apokrisis
Your brain is an accumulation of processing habits that will simply emit the right response when constrained by some general act of attention. — apokrisis
Finding refuge in the Gettier problem? Sly dog. — apokrisis
But you were talking about the "dogmatic" institutions – you know, the places that can house so many contradictory dogmas. — apokrisis
Exceptions to this include the later Wittgenstein, enactivism and social constructionist approaches in psychology. — Joshs
Does language serve a role in fusing habit and what is attended to in such a way as to transform the habit in the very act of engaging it? — Joshs
The game is to differentiate AND integrate. Go in both directions with the vigour that can arrive at a high state of dynamical contrast. — apokrisis
You seem to want to ask how to measure genius,I say the yardstick is obvious. Action and reaction. The push and its effect. A simple reciprocal equation, or Newton’s third law of motion. — apokrisis
So your acts of solitary genius are meaningless until they are understood as having been matched by an equal amount of intelligent response. — apokrisis
I was talking about the human tendency to dogmatize theories like Darwin's and the BB, according them the status of facts, of orthodoxy, and how that can make it difficult for competing theories to get heard. — Janus
What I'm getting at is (roughy) personality is the yardstick. — plaque flag
A certain kind of inquiring intelligence? — apokrisis
Maybe a forgotten politician Smith who lived in comfort and safety and cranked out many healthy children with a pneumatically admirable wife counts himself wiser and brighter than either Shakespeare or Newton — plaque flag
Oh I know of one Smith who not only thought of himself that way, but also convinced enough people to start a religion.
Though he had wives. — Moliere
Sorry. I couldn't help myself with the "Smith" name. — Moliere
let's imagined a shipwrecked composer with a harpsichord and plenty of coconuts. He soars to new musical heights on that island, — plaque flag
Better yet, let’s imagine the infinity of randomly typing monkeys banging away until the end of time.
We agree that they “must” produce every possible work of genius of any kind? And hence this proves something about genius? — apokrisis
Meaning has to be smuggled in somewhere to give life to the syntax. You want to claim it starts with the individual and so artfully arrange your thought experiment to achieve that illusion. I say go back and start again. — apokrisis
I’m not recognising the intellectual world you are quoiting Hands as describing — apokrisis
I think this is a properly balanced view. It's not either all social construction or the sovereign individual, but somewhere in between. — Janus
He was singular and different because of the generality or universality of what he had to say. We can focus on him to understand what we all ought to think. — apokrisis
Sure. Belatedly the Anglo world started to show up. So I don’t see these as exceptions but stragglers. Folk like Vygotsky and Luria already had the party well started in the 1920s. Social constructionist approaches to psychology arose out of that as the Russian texts finally got translated. — apokrisis
Meaning is 'dormant' (a 'spore' or 'virus') in/as a script without a reader. — plaque flag
I think that maybe you don't sufficiently address the importance of the subject. — plaque flag
I'm a holist focused on the (human) lifeworld that can't really be broken up except in terms of useful lies. — plaque flag
Language is tribal software. — plaque flag
The problem with the subjective stance is that even the self as a first person viewpoint is socially constructed.
Well it is first neurobiologically constructed. Pragmatic modelling means I can chomp my food with out chewing off my tongue.
But the kind of self that exists the social world where individuals can be acclaimed as "genius personalities" is a social construction. And needs to understood as such. Otherwise you are building your philosophical cities on foundations of sand. — apokrisis
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.