'For the person or persons that hold dominion, can no more combine with the keeping up of majesty the running with harlots drunk or naked about the streets, or the performances of a stage player, or the open violation or contempt of laws passed by themselves than they can combine existence with non-existence'.

- Benedict de Spinoza. Political Treatise. 1677.




Sunday, November 16, 2014

Philosophical Grammar 43


43. An explanation, a chart, is first used by being looked up, then by being looked up in the head, and finally as if it had never existed.

A rule as the cause or history behind our present behaviour is of no interest to us. But a rule can be a hypothesis, or can itself enter into the conduct of the game. If a disposition is hypothesized in the player to give the list of rules on request, it is a disposition analogous to a physiological one. In our study of symbolism there is no foreground and background.



an explanation – as if it had never existed?

perhaps – but any proposal – any proposition – is open to question – open to doubt –
regardless of use

yes behaviour can  described dispositionally and physiologically – and in any number of other ways

there is no definite description

as to symbolism – foreground and background?

the use of symbolism in defined practise is straightforward –

however symbolism does have a history – and a context –

symbolism is open to question



© greg t. charlton. 2014