Plus the signs of guilt or shame are often not in the things you do, but what you don't do. — frank
We're merely manipulating the symbol "consciousness" according to English grammar and the rules of inference (logic) - very much like a computer. In a certain sense then we've regressed...from semantics (our crown jewel) to syntax (mindless computing). — TheMadFool
Irrelevant red herring. Computers too have "bodies". — TheMadFool
We learn to use the word "concept" in various practical situations, but I think it's like "law" and "justice." It doesn't have a referent, or at least I find such a claim problematic. — hanaH
The law exists alright, even if it cannot be seen or put in a portrait. — Olivier5
A philosophy can have effects. In other words, imagining or postulating a philosophy (or a law) as an existing referent can be justified. — Olivier5
Joe stares off into the distance. Is he feeling guilty? How can you tell? — frank
the semantics (the beetle, the pain) "drops out of consideration".
— TheMadFool
I don't see how it does. If you go and see a doctor about your pain in the neck, he will inspect your neck and maybe find something objectively wrong with it. — Olivier5
I am thrown into a world of handshakes, salutes, and stop signs which are on the same "plane" as ice cream, parachutes, and mustaches. I thrive by acting on correlations prudently (sifting out "causation" or the more reliable ones.) — hanaH
I think it's moderately justified. I'd say that my issue is pretending that such an hypothesis is exactly right, or that it's without problems. Sensation words, as Witt shows, have some serious problems, at least if we hope to found a theory of meaning on them. — hanaH
How would I know if my pain is the same as the doctor's pain? — TheMadFool
The doctor doesn't need to have a pain in the neck in order to inspect necks of people having a pain in the neck. — Olivier5
is the doctor's pain the same as the patient's? That's impossible to divine. — TheMadFool
Code-> stand for, summon
Type-> set, group of things that are similar in some way — Olivier5
Yeah but why does it matter, as long as, assuming it's the same pain, things work? — Olivier5
Witt is playing in the dark and probably at the wrong game. All words are "sensation words" when you think of it. They all code for an idea of a thing, for a type of things, i.e. for a concept, not directly for a thing. The word "apple" codes for the idea of apple. — Olivier5
What happens to those handshakes, salutes and stop signs as we move from contextual situation to situation? — Joshs
The sense of meaning of handshakes , salutes and stops signs can be understood in an infinity of ways, depending on the way we are using these terms in the context of our dealings with others. — Joshs
"Now I am tempted to say that the right expression in language for the miracle of the existence of the world, though it is not any proposition in language, is the existence of language itself. ... For all I have said by shifting the expression of the miraculous from an expression by means of language to the expression by the existence of language"
Meaning is use doesn't stand up to closer examination. — TheMadFool
IMV the grammar of sensations is public behavior though. Toothaches and stopsigns both get their "meaning" (if we insist on taking such a concept seriously) from what happens outside us, in between us. — hanaH
language ... can be used for very many different things, perhaps things we can yet not imagine. — StreetlightX
That doesn't lead anywhere though. Because what am I supposed to make of what you or Witt say if your or his words have no referent at all? — Olivier5
Which naturally leads to something like hanaH's view that all of these uses and possible uses, even the ones we can't imagine now, have something in common: they are solutions to a coordination problem faced by living creatures like us. — Srap Tasmaner
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.