'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.




Thursday, December 04, 2014

Philosophical Grammar 68


68. My assumption that this house won’t collapse may be the utterance of a sentence which is part of a calculation. I do have reasons for it. What counts as a reason for an assumption determines a calculus. – So is the calculus something we adopt arbitrarily? No more so than the fear of fire.

As long as we remain in the province of true-false games a change of grammar can only lead us from one game to another, and never from something true to something false.



a reason for an assumption – an assumption for an assumption

a calculus  is a language-game –

arbitrarily? –

we have language practices – forms of language behaviour – which have use – which have currency – these practices can and do change with circumstances

as to fear of fire – it’s a question of circumstance

there is no necessity in human affairs –

and in a final sense – no non-arbitrary use of language

true is what you give your assent to – false – that which dissent from –

your reasons for assent and dissent are open to question – open to doubt –

they are uncertain

a change in language use – may or may not result – in a change in the truth value you give to a proposal

the matter cannot be predicted with certainty –

exactly how anyone will react to any proposal – or change of proposal – before they react is indeterminate –

true? – false? – no commitment?

and then any reaction – is open to question – open to doubt –

uncertain



© greg t. charlton. 2014.