that I can't know something without first articulating it linguistically, — Hanover
A very young child, say crawling on fours still, can learn that touching fire hurts by touching fire. They do not learn that "touching fire hurts" is a true statement. Statements are utterly meaningless to the child. — creativesoul
None of the following - the child, the fire, and the behaviour - are existentially dependent upon language. — creativesoul
I was left with the irony of there being this ineffable theory that could not be conveyed by you to me that denied ineffability. — Hanover
A very young child, say crawling on fours still, can learn that touching fire hurts by touching fire. They do not learn that "touching fire hurts" is a true statement. Statements are utterly meaningless to the child.
— creativesoul
None of the following - the child, the fire, and the behaviour - are existentially dependent upon language.
— creativesoul
And? The belief can still be stated. — Banno
Mad Mike says he believes that the Earth is flat, and this explains his behaviour. But in the long night of the soul he admits that the Earth is round, and holds himself up as the champion of empirical method who will show it to be so.
He never tells of this.
And yet both beliefs explain his behaviour. — Banno
that I can't know something without first articulating it linguistically,
— Hanover
Sort of. You can drop the "first".
Knowing how to ride a bike is demonstrated by riding a bike; knowledge of addition is demonstrated by doing addition. — Banno
A theory that could not be understood but with denies ineffability. Sweet! You can hear duck-rabbits marching!
And yet, since we understand it to deny ineffability, we understand at least part of it. — Banno
The story goes that if it cannot be said, it might be shown. So Mad Mike looks at a duck-rabbit and sees a rabbit. He is told it also looks like a duck, but he can't see it.
Perhaps he might move on by saying that Fred also sees a duck, but that he himself cannot; and thereafter remain silent.
Someone else (Apo?) comes along and says it's not really a duck or a rabbit, but a bunch of curved lines.
But Fred still sometimes sees the duck, sometimes the rabbit; Mike still sees the rabbit, but no duck. — Banno
Making a knowledge claim is not equivalent to, nor is it necessary for, acquiring knowledge. What it takes to make a knowledge claim is not equivalent to what it takes to have knowledge. — creativesoul
It is possible that Einstein arrived at his theories by himself and it could have been possible that he alone could understand his conclusions, with no one else being able to comprehend what he said. — Hanover
There are all sorts of ineffable theories. There are certainly some students that no amount of discussion is going to explain to them algebra, others are limited at geometry, others calculus, and certainly plenty of people can't begin to understand quantum mechanics. — Hanover
Have a think about what a theory understandable only by George would be like. Does George say "I have a theory about X but I can't explain it"? Or is the theory just word salad to us? — Banno
Have a think about what a theory understandable only by George would be like. Does George say "I have a theory about X but I can't explain it"? Or is the theory just word salad to us? — Banno
If you can assume on an island of 2 people that George understands something that Bob does not, regardless of how hard George tries, then you would have a theory of only 1. Bob would hear the sounds and try to understand the theory, but he couldn't. I don't understand why you find that impossible. — Hanover
Are you making an empirical claim about how knowledge is acquired where it must be understandable to another person in order for it to exist? — Hanover
If you can assume on an island of 2 people that George understands something that Bob does not, regardless of how hard George tries, then you would have a theory of only 1. Bob would hear the sounds and try to understand the theory, but he couldn't. I don't understand why you find that impossible. — Hanover
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.