• Asif
    208
    @Banno Who said anything about not looking?
    I can describe feelings without looking at them.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    It was an oblique reference to Philosophical Investigations §66.

    One is tempted to conclude some general theory as to the function of language - that all words are descriptions, for example - and then to look for examples. That's somewhat arse-about.

    Words are not all descriptions. Indeed, very few, if any, are descriptions. Look around.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno I've looked. There Descriptions. And they refer or point to descriptions. The referring and pointing Is part of the description. Is your post not describing your intention and meaning to me?
    Wittegenstein = a few good ideas then obscurantism sophistry and pedantry.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    Might leave it at that then.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno That's a good boy. I don't dig on appeals to authority.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    I don't dig on appeals to authority.Asif

    Ah, I see. It's just that you have added nothing new. All I could do with you is make a few bad jokes.

    But if you like: what is it that you think the word "the" describes?
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno It's an emphasis of the subject you are referring to. Emphasis is a part of description. This is fun!
  • Banno
    8.9k
    Glad you are enjoying yourself. Now, what does "emphasis describe?

    What about "it's"?

    "an"?

    "of"?

    and so on.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    Then we can move to more obvious problems, like what "nothing" describes...
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno The feeling when I want to draw extra attention or specify more accurately what I'm describing.
    This is easy. Common sense meets the neurosis of wittgenstein.
    (Let's wager the multiple examples banno will throw at me now. Platos dialectical sophistry at work,the banality and predictability of the academic and wanting to over define eveything.)
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno Ah,right on cue! Nothing depends on context.
    It describes the absence of something.
    You think description is merely looking still???!
  • Banno
    8.9k
    The feeling when I want to draw extra attention or specify more accurately what I'm describing.Asif

    Good, good. Now, what does "Asif" describe?
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno The word that identifies my personal name.
    Dependent on context once again.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    You think description is merely looking still???!Asif

    Oh, no. I think you have not been looking.

    What does "absence" describe?
  • Banno
    8.9k
    The word that identifies my personal name.Asif

    Hm. Shouldn't you say it describes your name?

    But that would be odd... since it is your name.

    If I said "'Asif' contains four letters, that would be a description.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno See,as I said above you will now throw numerous words at me like a pedant without recognising the general pattern and inference.
    Abscence describes lack of prescence.
    You are aware of the pattern yet?
  • Banno
    8.9k


    Hm. Does "Asif" describe your name, as you claimed; or is it your name?
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno Nope,sleight of hand on the name.
    Asif the name is a description of the sound used to identify me given a certain context.
    And you are just asking for descriptions of descriptions.
    I say look you say I cant see. That's on you.
    Asif is a description of the sound and a synonym is that ot is My name. Just different descriptions of the same thing.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    It's an emphasis of the subject you are referring to. Emphasis is a part of description.Asif

    Going back to this... Your claim is that all words are descriptions. But here I'm puzzled - is "the" a description, or just part of a description?
  • Banno
    8.9k
    Asif the name is a description of the sound used to identify me given a certain context.Asif

    The name is a description of the sound?

    Further, it's not used to describe you, it's used to identify you.

    But that can't be right, if "Asif" is a description.

    Help me out here.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno Lol! It is both. This atomistic dissection is funny. Even witty would scorn you for adhering too closely to the picture frame theory.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno Identity and description are the same thing.
    Words can have different degrees of description depending on context.
    Your feigned socratic ignorance is textbook!
  • Banno
    8.9k
    It is both.Asif

    It is a description and it is used to identify you? So it is a description and a use? Is the meanign of "Asif" given by what it describes, or by how it is used?

    I'm still puzzled as to what it means to say "Asif" is a description. Descriptions generally tell us something about thing they described; SO "Asif has red hair" is a description that tells me something about Asif. But Asif, the name, doesn't seem to tell me anything about you.

    Nor is it clear how you might deal with modality without the convenience of rigid designators. What woudl be your response to, say, Kripke? You can only imagine what he would make of this:

    Identity and description are the same thing.Asif

    Words can have different degrees of description depending on context.Asif

    SO, what is it that they have besides description? If, say, Asif is only a little bit of description, what is the remainder?

    Your feigned socratic ignorance is textbook!Asif

    Thank you. But I wonder that you think a Socratic ignorance might not be feigned? Wouldn't that just be plane ignorance?
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno A description is a use. Do you not use descriptions? Yes Asif the description tells you describes to you the personal sound I respond to in context. And describes me as a human. As time goes you can add to the description my name describes. "That pesky TPF poster who is too clever by half",etc etc.
    Names and words Always carry a description,those who are unaware of this may look at how names identify and describe things to the exclusion of other things and carry implications,like being human,etc. Naming is describing.
    A rigid designator? You mean a rigid description!
    Kripke another confused soul lacking common sense.
    I studied your 60 page plus thread of naming and necessity where Janus handed you your ass.
    And I'm aware of the worship of witty and the banality of language is use language doesnt refer nonsense!!!!!!!!!
    I'm Also aware of the way you sneakily insert chimeric contrasts and dichotomies like use and description!
    Sorry,your philosophy your " language game" is procrustean. And your "use" is merely trying to bolster a beloved pet theory with has woeful descriptive accuracy.
    New theory required mate.
  • Banno
    8.9k
    The erudition and the depth of knowledge you display leave me nonplussed. I'll leave you to it.
  • Asif
    208
    @Banno Great description!
    Pwned.
    A man too cowardly to confront the demolition of his twin idols.
    The ironic thing is the naming and necessity thread is the best in the history of TPF.
    From that thread,in spite of that thread the absolute folly of kripke witty and devotees was shown.
    Platos cratylus shows far more understanding of language but alas Plato also used truth for his own folly.
    You show ONE exception to description and I will show you wittys pink unicorn tesla space car.
145678Next
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

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.