John Searle on Ludwig Wittgenstein (1987) زیرنویس فارسی
120,870
Published 2015-09-05
The two linguistic philosophies of Ludwig Wittgenstein are discussed by Professor of Philosophy, John Searle. He examines Wittgenstein's earlier picture theory of meaning, in which reality, as perceived by humans, determines the structure of the language used to describe it. A revised theory views language as a tool that, depending upon its use, prescribes the reality.
All Comments (21)
-
Searle is the almost unchallenged when it comes explaining intricate concepts and ideas in a straigthforward, well structured, straight to the point kind of way, while also managing to not over-simplify the matter.
-
This was beautiful to listen to, thank you for the upload!
-
I had a wonderful philosophy teacher in NYC called Steven Ross. I get reminded of Ross' clarity and measured engagement when I listen to Searle, whom I wouldn't mind listen to and discuss with for quite a few semesters. Phenomenal pedagogue!
-
Back in the good days when John Searle was a real intellectual with sharp language skills.Right on the spot as far as the Wittgenstein analysis.
-
Thank you. Very excellent description of circumlocution
-
Wonderful accents on both of them, and I am reminded of the Fry & Laurie skit where they play two linguists discussing language, also sitting on a sofa like that.
-
Excellent overview
-
Magee published extended transcripts of these programs in book form, and they can also be found online.
-
thx great audio signature also adds to leibniz selection see table of content law language calculus ethics
-
philosophy of language: analytics, synthetics. Implicit meaning vs literal or precise meaning. Syntax and lexis.
-
what is the last work that Searle mentions at 40:20? Im interested in that idea, is very similar to ideas related to quantum mechanics foundations, the non-existence of mechanism behind experience (see Qbism, Wheeler)
-
So it’s similar to what Lacan says?
-
How is the tool analysis of language at all different from Heidegger's theory of the referential totality of significance?
-
31:50 “that he hadn’t said what he meant.” But with view of language as a game, how is there a fixed interpretation, or any meaning?
-
they start off saying that games do not have an essence and then use the term repeatedly to describe language.if the word does not have an essence it cannot be applied to a range of dissimilar phenomena without becoming utterly meaningless
-
Sapir Whorf Hypothesis and Wittgenstein's Thought ... Any inter-relationships ?
-
32:00 What if one realized what Wittgenstein was trying to point to?
-
John Searle was my philosophy professor at Berkeley...
-
Wittgenstein, like so many that came after Kant, was in some way disturbed by Kant's late works, like Critique of Pure Reason, Critique of Practical Reason and Critique of Judgement. In fact, post Kant, philosophers tended to be pro Kant or anti-Kant. Wittgenstein, to deny anything above and before language, went the utilitarian route with both his major books. I don't think that route, so popular since about 1950, gets around Kant. Kant's claim was that we have rules of Reasoning in place when born and those rules construct our spatio-temporal conscious picture of the world and language is slaved to those rules for the most part. That society is in agreement on so much is not because we have socially constructed or enforced agreement/submission but because the rule set we are born with assures agreement on so much.
-
They are both still alive and kicking today.
