On 7/4/2015 7:10 PM, Thomas Johnston wrote:
> But I've never found Wittgenstein, earlier or later, of direct
> relevance to my thought. (01)
What I found most relevant about the later Wittgenstein is his
ability to ask probing questions that show how pointless some
so-called philosophical questions really are. (02)
Neither Peirce nor Wittgenstein would tolerate such questions.
Peirce had no sympathy for Descartes' "Cogito ergo sum." Nobody
but a lunatic or somebody "in the grip of a philosophical theory"
could doubt that he existed. (03)
Pretending to search for certainty by starting with a universal
doubt leads to the worst kind of philosophical nonsense. Descartes
was a brilliant mathematician, but his attempt to make philosophy
as precise as mathematics misled several centuries of philosophers. (04)
That "philosophical disease", as Wittgenstein called it, is at the
heart of the program by Frege, Russell, and Carnap to replace natural
languages with a purified language of logic. (05)
Peirce, Whitehead, and Wittgenstein were pioneers in logic, and
they appreciated its value. But Peirce recognized that Ernst Mach's
positivism was a mistake. Whitehead and Wittgenstein recognized
that the logical positivism of the Vienna circle was a "grave error",
as Wittgenstein called it. (06)
And note how Whitehead introduced Russell at Harvard: "This is my
good friend Bertrand Russell. Bertie thinks that I am muddleheaded.
But I think that he is simpleminded." (07)
Note my answer to Rich (copy below). Rich asked the question whether
philosophy is useful. But he has been asking the worst kind of
philosophical questions. My response to him is a bit of "therapy"
along the lines that Ludwig W. advocated. (08)
John (09)
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Is Philosophy Useful in Software
Engineering Ontologies?
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2015 16:33:57 -0400
From: John F Sowa (010)
On 7/5/2015 11:21 AM, Rich Cooper wrote:
>> how would we know if we are truly looking at the **same world**, or
>> at the **same system**, the **same problem**, the **same project**,
>> whatever you like to call your plans, if you use them?
>> How could you tell? (011)
JFS
> Since we are all on the same planet, the answer to the first question
> is obvious: there is no other option. If you don't believe that, you
> belong in a loony bin.
>
> RC: So I will put your name in the **unconvinced** column on this issue. (012)
No!!! Put my name in the column that says "Convinced that the question,
as stated, is based on a confusing misuse of the English language." (013)
For the other questions, put my name in the column that says
"To be answered by asking the speaker 'What do you mean?'" (014)
John (015)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (016)
|