66. The idea that one language in contrast to others can have an order
of words which corresponds to the order of thinking.
It is, as it were, a contamination of the sense that we express it in a
particular language? Does it impair the rigour and purity of the proposition 25
x 25 = 625 that it is written down in a particular number system?
Thought can only be something common or garden. But we are affected by
this concept as we are by that of the number one
‘The idea that one language in contrast to others can have an order of
words which corresponds to the order of thinking’?
this idea requires two proposals – two propositions –
one is the order of thinking –
and that has to be put in some language
and the other proposal is a language that corresponds to the order of
thinking – to the first language
if they correspond – the ‘two’ languages – will be one in the same
so what you end up with – is the proposal – that this language –
whatever it is – corresponds to the order of thinking –
it strikes me as a vacuous claim that could be made of any language –
the real question though is – what is the point of such a claim?
it is to ‘ground’ language or a language – in thought –
it is a foundationalist argument
logically speaking any proposal is open to question – open to doubt –
the ‘foundation’ – if you want to persist with this terminology – of any
proposition –
is uncertainty
‘It is, as it were, a contamination of the sense that we express it in a
particular language? Does it impair the rigour and purity of the proposition 25
x 25 = 625 that it is written down in a particular number system?’
there is no contamination of
sense –
if the sense given in a
particular characterization – doesn’t express what you want –
find another characterization –
you may never hit on just the
right characterization –
that’s language – that’s life –
and that is the lesson to be learnt
‘the rigour and purity of the
proposition’ –
this wouldn’t be to load up the
proposition with rhetoric by any chance?
‘25 x25 = 625’ – is like any
proposition – open to question – open to doubt –
the history of mathematics of
arithmetic – is a history of question – of doubt – of uncertainty
mathematics as commonly practiced
is a game –
when you play games with language
– you suspend logic – you suspend question and doubt –
this is not rigour and purity –
this is game playing –
and furthermore – it is not as if
there is some over-riding proposition – that various formulations approach –
what we have is what is proposed
– just what is proposed – in whatever
language –
and whatever is proposed – is
open to question – open to doubt – is uncertain
‘Thought can only be something common or garden. But we are affected by
this concept as we are by that of the number one’?
this concept of thought – is like
any other concept – open to interpretation –
a matter for speculation
© greg t. charlton. 2014.
