Dissidents Philosophy Forum

Internet Philosophical Community
 
HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 langauge of philosophy/linguistics

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
myhypocricy
Potential Contributor
Potential Contributor
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 30
Age : 30
Location : the fire nation
Registration date : 2009-01-03

PostSubject: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Mon Jan 05, 2009 5:21 pm

This was initially brought up by Unreasonable at:
http://dissidentsphilosophy.alldiscussion.net/feedback-f15/suggestions-t20.htm#1200

I thought, “HEY, what better way to start the new section: discussion of the appropriate title!”
Is philosophy of language nonexistent? Is it redundant? Was there ever such thing as philosophy of language, but now linguistics has taken over? Is it the same thing as linguistics? Or should all such inquiries fall under the banner of linguistics?

Unreasonable stated: “Philosophy essentially is language already.” What exactly does that mean? Is it that I speak the language of “philosophy?” Philosophy itself has a syntax and grammar? Or does he mean something more metaphorical? Is he equating the definition of philosophy to the analytic school? Is Philosophy of “X” superfluous and outmoded?

In other words…what should this section be called? And why?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Foxyrockets
Unestablished Ideals
Unestablished Ideals


Number of posts : 5
Registration date : 2009-02-25

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Wed Feb 25, 2009 2:17 pm

Many questions Myhypocricy
here's my interpretation:

1. I don't think philosophy of language is nonexistent.
2. I don't think it's redundant, although an epistemological analysis of its history could tell us if there are points where it could be, or was deemed so in the past
3. Philosophy of language and linguistics probably started out the same thing, and then both took different paths. Even if linguistics remains the choice for structural and formal analysis of language, I still think that the philosophy of language has a whole domain where it can extend itself. Linguistics don't address more subtle issues of language, such as poetry, or the reach of language for something beyond itself-meaning, or truth, or an ultimate reality.
4. I don't think it is the same thing as linguistics (see point 3)
5. I don't think all inquiries about language should fall under "linguistics": see reasons above

6. Unreasonable is right Smile Philosophy, in the sense that it is a description of the world around us, is a language, a way of saying things and putting names on them: concepts, for example, are like the words of philosophy.
7. What is speaking the language of philosophy? Philosophizing, since philosophy is the language.
8. You could consider that philosophy has structures one can liken to syntax or grammar (after all, philosophy also respects some rules, for example: the non-contradiction of ideas within systems, unity of the system, and where possible, the embrace by the system of the whole world)
9. Of course the idea that philosophy is a language is metaphorical, in a sense. Jacques Lacan once said that "the unconscious is structured like a language". Well, philosophy may also be "structured like a language": with its different speakers, its interpreters, the people who try to discover what ancient languages of philosophy were like...there is a whole metaphorical linguistics of philosophy!
10. No doubt the analytics have their word to say on this...indeed, where would we be without the "atomic language" propounded by Wittgenstein, or the analysis of that school in the domain of language. Austin, for example, has made a tremendous contribution, especially the speech act.
11. What is the philosophy of "X"? Well certainly whether it is outmoded or not depends on who decides to take it up Smile

I think you should go ahead and call this section "Philosophy of language" (since there's already a linguistics section). It could become the rallying point for comments on philosophy of language in any age of history, as well as a meeting-place for those who wish to experiment with their own theories...what do you think?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Taras
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 83
Location : Maidan Nezalezhnosti
Registration date : 2009-01-03

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sat Feb 28, 2009 5:46 am

Foxyrockets wrote:
I think you should go ahead and call this section "Philosophy of language" (since there's already a linguistics section). It could become the rallying point for comments on philosophy of language in any age of history, as well as a meeting-place for those who wish to experiment with their own theories...what do you think?
The points are interesting,

Agree: "Jacques Lacan once said that "the unconscious is structured like a language".

Suspicious: "What is speaking the language of philosophy? Philosophizing, since philosophy is the language."

I don't know exactly why, but this "philosophizing" makes me feel uncomfortable. It's fascist; the movement, no end and no beginning. Is there not some objective or use with philosophy?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Foxyrockets
Unestablished Ideals
Unestablished Ideals


Number of posts : 5
Registration date : 2009-02-25

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sat Feb 28, 2009 2:26 pm

Hi Taras,

I didn't know the word "philosophizing" had a fascist counterpart to it...!

Well I certainly didn't intend it to sound fascistic in any way.

Would you care to expand on that?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Unreasonable
Animated Voice
Animated Voice
avatar

Male
Number of posts : 728
Age : 34
Location : Purgatory
Registration date : 2008-12-13

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sat Feb 28, 2009 2:38 pm

Yeah, I caught that too...

What is not Fascist then? Why is Fascism a bad thing? It is because you are not the dictator and you wish you were?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Taras
Active Idealist
Active Idealist


Number of posts : 83
Location : Maidan Nezalezhnosti
Registration date : 2009-01-03

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sun Mar 01, 2009 2:47 am

Foxyrockets wrote:
Hi Taras,

I didn't know the word "philosophizing" had a fascist counterpart to it...!

Well I certainly didn't intend it to sound fascistic in any way.

Would you care to expand on that?
Unreasonable wrote:
Yeah, I caught that too...

What is not Fascist then? Why is Fascism a bad thing? It is because you are not the dictator and you wish you were?
Yes, wishing to be the dictator is part of it. Also, it is because of Karl Jaspers, he talked a lot about philosophizing and rightly or wrongly I've always associated him with Heidegger. That may be unfair, but I am not the only one to connect Existentialism with both fascism and capitalism. All three are dialectical philosophies with really no moral basis, a machine with no purpose.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Foxyrockets
Unestablished Ideals
Unestablished Ideals


Number of posts : 5
Registration date : 2009-02-25

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sun Mar 01, 2009 11:29 am

Oh come on...that is a verb. I usually speak French in my environment, where we say "philosopher" (to philosophize-or to practice philosophy, or speak philosophically, or think, or speculate philosophically) and never intended it to have any connotation other than that. However if you're still convinced that I am a fascist then at least give some time to prove you right. That was only my first or second post on this forum, and already you've given me a tag.

I don't see why anyone would wish to be a dictator. It's hard enough being a citizen already. And with regard to the connections between Jaspers and Heidegger, well, that's unfortunate. I don't hold any special regard for any one of them, nor do I for Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, or any other philosopher one might care to associate with fascism of one taste or another. I thought philosophers were supposed to be above ideological work.

I wish you would expand on the philosophies which do have moral basis, then, if existentialism does not. That would provide for a real, non-ideological, truly philosophical debate.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Dako
Active Idealist
Active Idealist
avatar

Number of posts : 99
Registration date : 2009-02-08

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Tue Mar 03, 2009 10:46 pm

Foxyrockets wrote:
Oh come on...that is a verb.

(to philosophize-or to practice philosophy, or speak philosophically, or think, or speculate philosophically
Infinitives are not real verbs, otherwise we could use them in the -V- slot. (Typology.)

Quote :
...never intended it to have any connotation other than that.
I sometimes forget how words are understood by others too...

Quote :
if you're still convinced that I am a fascist then at least give some time to prove you right. That was only my first or second post on this forum, and already you've given me a tag.
I'm not at all convinced. I see how the tread makes it look though, my bad.

Quote :
I don't see why anyone would wish to be a dictator.
Have you tried it? That's the surest way to know if you'd like it, or not.

Quote :
It's hard enough being a citizen already.
A citizen? That's "molarization". There wouldn't be a word citizen if there were not dictators as contrast. It's similar to how civilian is a word of military jargon, using it sets folks like you and me inside the militarist's paradigm.

Quote :
I thought philosophers were supposed to be above ideological work.
Should philosophy be useless, or should it have a moral objective? (These days I lean towards the latter.)

Quote :
I wish you would expand on the philosophies which do have moral basis
I wish I would too. Not certain...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Foxyrockets
Unestablished Ideals
Unestablished Ideals


Number of posts : 5
Registration date : 2009-02-25

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:41 am

Hmm...
1. Fine
2. Misunderstanding seems to be at the root of this post
3. Here's the way I see it. I say something, and somehow it resonates badly with someone else. So what way do I have of proving that I was not even thinking about fascism when I wrote those words?
4. Never tried dictatorship. Seen enough of them in the world. Would prefer to dedicated life to philosophy rather than politics
5. Fine
6. Even if philosophy was useless it wouldn't stop people from practicing it. Philosophy as a whole has survived many regimes, including fascist ones, which encourages me to say that the "evil" people out there (those who want to destroy philosophy or thought) haven't yet won. Our duty as philosophers should be to ensure that everyone gets to keep their philosophy. Incidentally, I know Deleuze said that there was a fascist, a power-loving brute inside all of us. I'm even ready to accept that "philosophizing" does have a deeply fascist meaning and that its use is the result of a conspiracy to make people use fascist-oriented words (though I don't believe that).

If some individuals really care about who is fascist, or are determined to detect the fascism in other people, then let's talk about it. If not, I think it's pretty pointless to blast other people as "fascist" without knowing them. Those who do that might think how they would feel if they were abused in such a way. Fascism has a long history and there are certainly many reasons for which some people recoil from the idea. Some of us are still convinced that it is possible to have meaningful discussions with others without it degenerating into a rehearsed, dialectic, rhetorical ideology debate.

Shall we go ahead with linguistics?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Hadji
Potential Contributor
Potential Contributor
avatar

Number of posts : 43
Registration date : 2009-03-04

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Fri Mar 06, 2009 7:56 am

Foxyrockets wrote:
Hmm...

4. Would prefer to dedicated life to philosophy rather than politics
How do you separate these?

Quote :
Our duty as philosophers should be...
Yes, so then philosophy and the world are connected?

Quote :
Some of us are still convinced that it is possible to have meaningful discussions with others without it degenerating into a rehearsed, dialectic, rhetorical ideology debate.
That is impossible I think? No, there is some genuine connection here, a little.

Quote :
Shall we go ahead with linguistics?
You go first, I'm shy.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Philosopher8659
Potential Contributor
Potential Contributor


Male
Number of posts : 11
Age : 67
Registration date : 2014-07-04

PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   Sat Jul 05, 2014 12:02 am

I see that people either do not read Plato, or simply do not comprehend what they read.
Plato, like the rectification of names by Confucius, believed that human will was produced as a function of language. I have done several audiobook readings of different translations of his work on the internet archive.

The Biblical Name of the Beast is a language puzzle, and its solution actually tells you what the function of the mind is and thus its relationship to language.

If, as Plato stated (and it is true) that Philosophy contains every endeavor of man, such statements as the Philosophy of a this or that can only be uttered by someone devoid of rational reasoning. The container is not the contained.
Back to top Go down
View user profile https://archive.org/search.php?query=johnclark8659&sort=-pub
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: langauge of philosophy/linguistics   

Back to top Go down
 
langauge of philosophy/linguistics
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Second year literature and philosophy yearly planning 2013
» On Zen Masters - some thoughts from Stuart Lachs
» Voices Speaking Foreign Languages.
» Insightful Essay: Post-Traditional Buddhism - the Quiet Revolution
» Taha Chuan: State law pursues the philosophy of autocracy will not respond to the criticisms of MPs Majid Asadi and the Barzani Thursday, March 22 / March 2012 18:25

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Dissidents Philosophy Forum :: Linguistics-
Jump to: