| Blog | Cyworld | Category |  | List  | Guest_book |
[Vomit] 카이사르 | 2009/12/28 04:47











오늘밤은

루비콘강을 넘었던 카이사르의 심정이다

는 무슨 그냥 이건 역사드립



ㅅㅂ 지구야 멸망해라
 
Trackback | Comment(1)

[Vomit] 내일은 | 2009/12/27 21:34









월요일임 ㅇㅇ
 
Trackback | Comment

[Vomit] 농담 | 2009/12/26 03:20











중국 고대에 있었다던 요순시대에는

백성들이 정치에 신경쓰지 않아도 삶에 아무런 문제가 없었다고 한다





아마도 우리가 추구하는 모든 것의 결과는

그것이 매우 중요하기 때문에 그것을 항상 신경쓰고 엄숙하게 지켜나가는 형태가 아니라

그것을 별로 신경쓰지 않고도 문제가 없기 때문에 그 가치에 반하는 농담을 하더라도

그다지 문제가 되지 않는 상태가 되는 것이 더 좋다고 생각한다





농담이 가능하다는 것은 사람들이 굳이 말하지 않아도

사람들이 서로 심한 상처를 주는 행동은 하지 않는다는 신호니까
 
Trackback | Comment

[Vomit] ? | 2009/12/26 03:06










진짜 진지하게

정말 궁금해서 묻는건데

오늘 무슨 날임?
 
Trackback | Comment

[Thinking] From truth to communication | 2009/12/22 03:09







From truth to communication

20080490 Danho Ahn

Prologue: Truth and early Wittgenstein

   Since when babies can speak, they start to ask trillions of whys. Why sky is blue, why tiger has stripe and why leaves are falling in autumn and so on. Then they feel that there should be an end of question. Also with that end of question we can make the only answer of all questions. That is what we call truth. Most of people want to see that end. Thus we can see many religions and studies want to find that truth. Hegel talked about absolute mind; Newton wanted to explain all the natural phenomena and even Wittgenstein want to see the end of linguistic analysis. That is the picture theory of meaning.
   In picture theory Wittgenstein construct hierarchical system of language and its corresponding world. In the language there are proposition, elementary proposition and name as a level. Also in the language there are fact, atomic fact and object and each level is pictured by same levels of language except object. Because object and name has no logical form but they are referring relation. Thus name and object is the end of linguistic analysis. Also it is truth because one name corresponding to one object no other way of relation exists.
   However there are some problems of early theory. Thus later Wittgenstein criticized his own argument and he gives new concepts of language. They are circumstance and family resemblance. We will see what the problems are. First problem is the end of analysis and second problem is the concept of truth and essence.

Intermission I: Referentialism and Circumstance

   When we define a word, the easiest way is ostensive definition. Point the object with a finger and say a word. For example point a chair on the floor and say a word chair. This kind of definition is the basis of language for early Wittgenstein and Logical Positivists. Not only philosophy but also physics has similar entity of ostensive definition. Because the concept of particle is correspond to real existing point-like object. Also many of scientists believe that it really exists.
   However later Wittgenstein points the problem of ostensive definition with the concept of circumstance. When we point the object, there is some basis agreement that makes we can understand ostensive definition. That is circumstance. If we do not have any circumstance we cannot understand pointing action, because we do not know whether he is pointing chair, chair and floor or finger itself. Thus there is no absolute relationship between name and object.
   Also we can apply this argument to physics. When we define a fundamental particle we also premise some circumstance. Atomic structure is available in low temperature and low speed. If we have high temperature or high speed we have another particle such as quark. However we do not know what kind of circumstance is needed on quark theory. Thus every scientific theory breaks down out of certain circumstance. So we cannot make a theory that completely explains the world with ostensive definition Therefore there is no end of question.

Intermission II: Essentialism and Family Resemblance

   Essence is the one common aspect of the objects under the concept such as definition. When we explain something we usually use the concept of essence. Like when we define an apple, we explain the common feature of apple such as redness and the fruit of tree. Thus we already have definition of term and we call the object with that essence. This is what we call truth, the one kind of explanation of the world.
   However later Wittgenstein said that there is no common feature of objects that is under the word. For example we can call toy apple as an apple and the apple image on screen as an apple. So there are similarities between each object but the contents of similarity are different. Toy apple and apple has same physical shape but image apple and apple has same light image. Like father and me has common nose shape but mother and me has common curly hair. Wittgenstein called this kind of feature of language is family resemblance. Also this feature shows us there is no unchangeable essence of a term in language. Therefore there is no the one explanation.
   Until now we discussed about the problem about the end of analysis and the truth. However this is not meaning that there is nothing that human can do. From apple example we can see the new kind of value that is making a new kind of use for language. Because we use the term apple in a new kind of circumstances like toy apple and image apple. We will see this in detail on next part.

Intermission III: Meaning as Use and Making a new Use

   Later Wittgenstein’s explanation of meaning is use. So when we define a term ostensibly, that activity is not an essence, but one kind of use for that term. However Wittgenstein closes the ability of language through criticizing the private language. Wittgenstein emphasizes the social property of language so we are following rule of language and the rule is agreed by people. Sure this is a one possible view of language but there also exists a language game that explains language through private language.
   There was a baby example at the first part. It seems baby asking essence but baby do not know what is essence. So we can explain these questions are asking the new use of language. First time baby do not know what the use of the words is but after seeing how parents use the terms he or she can produce proper use of language. If the story ends here there is no private language, but after babies grown up they make their own language use and culture. We can see these phenomena in the African American English. First generation of African American used English very simply (Pidgin). They just switch the words into English words on the African language grammar structure (Creole). However after time passes new generation makes new use of English and now they have their own dialect of English. We can see this kind of example in all language and even art works, baroque to contemporary popular music. If there is no private entity in language, this phenomenon should not be occurred.
   So each person can make his or her own use of language. So we can include creative entity of language into the explanation. And this is the new way of progress instead of finding truth. However it is not meaning that any kind of use is proper. We should make new evaluation system for new standard. That is effective communication.

Finale: Effective Communication

   We can consider every human activity as a communication system. Then the most important value is effective communication because we easily fail the communication. We can these failures in everywhere, fighting politicians, arguing lovers, oppressive parents and irresponsible children even French postmodern philosophers and analytical philosophers. The one big problem is everyone pursue I am the truth, so the language games cannot compatible each other. However we already see there is a problem with the concept of truth. Thus the truth argument of each language game is just a leadership struggle. With this kind of struggle we cannot communicate effectively.
   Therefore when we make a new use of language or new language game, it has to satisfy a condition. That is compatibility. If two language games are not compatible each other the problems occur as present upper because one system cannot understand other system. However when two language game is compatible each other, they can coexist as different point of views for one phenomena. Also if one system has a problem we can fix another system so they supplement each other. For example we can describe nature as particle or wave. This duality occurs in physics but these two positions do not contradict each other.
   This is not a theory that explains the language phenomena but this is the imagination of one kind of good language system. However there is some difference between others in the concept goodness. Many studies pursue only completeness, truth, exactness or efficiency and they forget about value of communication. Truth is illusion and that cannot be our only purpose because that makes us to fight and we can progress without truth through other value. That is making a new use of language and effective communication.





분석철학 마지막 레포트

야심차게 준비해서 쓰긴 썼는데

영어로 잘 전달이 됐을런지는 모르겠다

하여튼 결론은 진리나 진실같은 허상이 아닌

새로운 용법의 개발과 효과적인 의사소통을 추구해야한다는 것
 
Trackback | Comment

← 1 2 3 4 5 .. 469 →
 
   새해 관대함 언어분석학 Analytic Politics 아 시댕 속쓰려 이미지 Auditory Nerve 쌈박질 시험 ㅗ Sleep Dynamic Equilibrium ㅋㅋㅋㅋ 기본 원리 Infants 사고방식 Enemies 모니터링 총 편견 Guest 으악 뒷북 불안 불독맨션 스프링 절 SAC 지구용사 다채로움 현악기 순수성 교육 싫증 Expression 농담을 농담으로 받아들이기 위해 걸리는 시간 시공간 가치판단 Belif 독립 애니어그램 Vitaminless 놀고먹기 역시 노력 Writing Entertainment 가사 자급자족 슈뢰딩거의 고양이 한국 드라마
 
Tattertools.com / Design by Ryoung's