Wittgenstein's Thesis On The Explanation Of Private Language

Learning a new language seems to have only positive effects. However, for a Mexican American, accomplishing this goal brought him drawbacks in the interaction with his family. In his essay, ‘’Public and Private language,’’ Richard Rodriguez describes the difficulty in learning a new language and the sacrifice he makes to accomplish his goal. Richard Rodriguez shares the difficulty for older people, as they learn a new language; however, for younger generations is easier to learn a new language. Also, the new language creates a lack of communication for Richard Rodriguez.

By establishing a sympathetic tone, Kozol effectively appeals our emotions, which provides slight strength to his argument. For example, Kozol explains his dream he experienced where he was in the Soviet, “Then I remember that my card was confiscated for some reason, many years before. Around this point, I wake up in a panic” (2). Kozol’s tone illustrates how helpless the illiterates are and wants to appeal to our emotion of sympathy as he draws comparison to the same troubles and emotions he experienced in his dream as illiterates experience daily. That emotional impact provided some strength to his argument because it allows us to imagine an experience, which may be unfamiliar. Kozol insinuates that illiterates match logos printed on packages to distinguish the differences amongst food. Kozol points out, “The purchaser who cannot read and does not dare

(3) In §118, Wittgenstein alludes to a diagram (derived from Jastrow, depicted below) of what one may ordinarily interpret as a duck or a rabbit. This section demonstrates that one may see an ambiguous picture in one way (e.g., seeing the duck), and then the aspect “dawns” on them that the picture could be otherwise (e.g., it could be a rabbit).

Words are like vessels—they are merely novel constructions of sounds empty of meaning until we fill them. They mean only what we discern in them, and nothing more.

Recently we have read and discussed Rodger Gottlieb’s essay “Can we Talk? Understanding the ‘Other Side’ in the Animal Rights Debate” and Anthony Weston’s ideas of the three integrative methods: compromise, compatible values, and common ground, in the textbook, A 21st Century Ethical Toolbox. Weston claims that Gottlieb “makes use of all the integrative tools offered.” Therefore, we will discuss Weston’s definitions of the methods and how Gottlieb incorporates them into his views throughout his essay. Then, we will discuss how Gottlieb’s essay ties back into the ideas of dialogue as discussed by Weston in chapter 11. Lastly, I will provide my own opinion on Gottlieb’s views and discuss what interests and values ground this opinion.

We use language in order to traverse the infinite distance between the Same and the Other. This “distance is untraversable, and at the same time traversed” (62). Truth arises when a person recognizes the Other as such, “where a being separated from the other is no engulfed in him, but speaks to him” (62).

These examples verify that though we may not know the outcome of speaking words into actuality, they can be accommodating as we continue to discover life and communication is. Think of it this way, one may never know the purpose of a word if you had not communicated it into existence, and without a word existing one may not know what it pertains to, and that brings about ignorance. Ignorance in return prohibits you from further exploring communication and sometime your own

“Particular form of consciousness, out of which arise types of experience, akin to, but not to be confused or equated with, those labeled ‘religious’, and which results in a special sort of spirituality, giving that word a wide connotation, and predisposition to interrogate and interpret the universe in particular way. Further, I have regarded it as a tenable hypothesis that this ‘mystical consciousness’ is, of its nature, in some way a development and extension of rational consciousness, resulting in an enlargement and refining of perception, and consequently having a noetic quality, so that through it knowledge of the ‘real’ is gained which could not be gained through rational

The function of language that was introduced by Roman Jakobson (Hébert, 2011) has existed to assist us in the process of communication. Thus, I will analyse a scene in a drama that I watched on the television, by using the Jakobson’s Six Language Functions and how it overlaps with the classical theories. The scene that I will analyse is an episode of Game of Thrones entitled; and Now His Watch Is Ended.

But Wittgenstein shows us that to a large extent in our ordinary use of language, and especially in our psychological language, it is many levels of consciousness and diverse modes of knowing that are active beyond the rational. In these cases, language functions primarily in a non-literal way. Expressions like: "I have it on the tip of my tongue", or "it breaks my heart", or "I have a great idea" (6) function in a very different way than literal statements. While the latter can be verified by direct observation of the facts they register, the former

For me what seems to us to, cause us to act, our desire, does, on my view, do just that. If I am asked for the proximate cause of my action in picking up my coffee cup, for example, I will respond that it was my desire for the coffee. In identifying the cause of human action, striving, with conscious desire, then, (III p9s) vindicates common sense to a degree. Had I identified desire with something other than striving, then I would have committed himself to the view that my desire does not in fact cause me to pick up the cup. Desire for me, in its narrow definition at, is both psychological and physical, and in its broader definition at, Definitions of the Affects I, it may be either. So, this example, perhaps despite appearances, need not conflict with me, denial of mind-body interaction.) I am one of character someone who believes that the idea of oneself as an internal cause becomes an important part of my ethical theory, a species of which is even blessedness, the highest form of human happiness. I said “Human beings, as finite modes, cannot on my view avoid affecting and being affected by external objects.” Nevertheless, I emphasis on self-esteem and, in his ethical theory, on self-knowledge suggests that to the extent we can bring about effects, including our own emotions, as whole or adequate

Foremost among the structural similarities between Kierkegaard and Wittgenstein works is the use of indirect communication: as paradoxical as it may sound, both authors deliberately obfuscate their philosophy for the purposes of clarifying it. Clarification of the preceding assertion is obviously required. Each author felt that, due to inherent properties of their subject matter, outright delineation of their conclusions would somehow be a self-contradiction. Clearly their respective subject matter, the logical structure of language and the task of becoming a Christian, is inherently disparate. But let us examine more closely particular instances of indirect communication from both of the philosophers with the intention of finding similarity.

For Ludwig Wittgenstein to really provide us with a thorough account of propositions he needs to explain the nature of logical constants. Wittgenstein was a thinker who remained skeptical as to whether logical constants could be representational. For him, (negations, conditionals, connectives, conjuncts, disjuncts, etc) are not constituents of the proposition but are instead structural elements of that proposition. The notion that the nature of logical constants is inherently structural, seems clear in Wittgenstein’s reference to them in relation to punctuation. In 5.4611, Wittgenstein declares that “Logical operation signs are punctuations”, and it seems in this sense they must have a syntactical role. With this notion in mind the proposition that “Greg is a lobster”, would have the same sense as the proposition that “Greg is not a lobster”. It’s feasible to assume that the negated proposition has an extra situation or object (the negation) that goes above and beyond the unnegated proposition. For Wittgenstein however, this is not the case because negative facts merely account for the non-existence of a state of affairs. Therefore, because “not” is a structural element (and not a name) it can only be a truth function that reverses the “sense” of a proposition.

On page 850, he explains what he considers to be the characteristic of language. He says that language is just a system for phonic images and were we’re first introduced to his obsession with sound image, “..auditory image becomes associated with a concept..”

The second part will base on the observation in first argument and argue that implication of term is part of the process of interpretation. Along the argument, author will strive to argue that the criticisms towards Lord Hoffmann’s are unconvincing.