Grice, of Oxford Town

In his own evidence for

"Why Hacker isn't a greater philosopher than Grice", this blog (almost), J writes:

"As some old number went,
to oxford town, I have not been, or-- I have not to Oxford town been. Neither the Anglo, or Missisippi one. Oxnard, though, ive visited. ah, Olde Oxnard towne."

I should do some research on that. I collect notes and queries on Ox- towns. Of course, you don't see the 'ford', much. It was originally called, in a more logical , Oxen-ford, since the place operated as a 'ford' (or bridge) for the oxen (rather than just one The Ox) to cross the water. The water is the Royal Tamesis, Thames. But it changes name there: Isis and Cherwell.

---- Then it becomes Thames again further upstream. Oddly, the Thamesis originates in either Staffordshire or some other place. Laurence Tapper, a Griceian, once objected to the idiomatic expression,

"the mouth of the river"

-- for the Tamesis, the Estuary.

Not so much on its poor metaphorical character (cfr. Grice, "You're the cream in my coffee"), but because, literally (almost) it should best be called,

--- The arse*ole of the river.

seeing that the 'mouth', if mouth it is, should be where a river originates, and not where it dies. Similarly, Tapper objects to the use of 'leg' in "leg of the chair" and refers to them as 'modular limbs'. ("Less rude").

----

J adds about Toulmin's "Uses of Argument" -- Indeed Toulmin was never renewed his contract in Leeds, and had to emigrate to America, on account of his having had an affair with one of his female students. Some uses of argument.

About the book,

"[It is] helpful. To a Wittgenquine, or GC reg, or commies, probably dull."

I was reading some material by N. Allott the other day -- his PhD thesis for UCL is on "Rationality" and he notes that things like,

"Hey!"

"My mother!"

"Heavens!"

etc. -- very "like" as his examples are other --

should not count as 'premises' in the recovery of conversational implicature.

It would be odd to count "Heavens, no!" as a premise. Yet, the logical form is

-p

not p.

Allott possibly after Toulmin thinks Grice would classify that subpropositional or subsentential material as "warrant" rather than 'premise'.

So, yes, a helpful book.

J goes on:

"To students who barely made it through a Cali. public school ...quite reasonable, though a bit British."

Yes. There are two many examples from the courts -- British system, which cannot but bore the Un-Brit. But then, Toulmin is arguing that our epitome of 'argument' is what lawyers do. I once taught logic in the USA, and one day I was evaluating the whole class on whether they had survived, in an educational way, to my exposure on the topic of 'argue' and 'argument'. A student said, and aloud too,

"So, if I understood you 'right, 'to argue', is like to _fight_, but only with words".

(E.g. "Stop arguing with me").

J goes on:

"American educators (and students)--whether at a UC level, or the 'burbs, simply don't care for the British, whether its Schackaspeare, or Bertrand Russell."

Right. I tend to call Grice "Paul Grice", on occasion, to seduce the Americans. Americans would use initials, like "H. P. Grice" only on very special occasions. They think that what the Brits called the "Christian" name (or names) should NEVER be hidden (from 'explicature').

In Clifton, where Grice studied, he would be referred to as "Grice" -- by everybody. In the programme -- he played the piano for a 1932 concert -- his name is 'explicated' as

"H. P. Grice".

The first time Grice disclosed, in print, that his name was "Paul" was circa 1970.

His first name was "Herbert".

His _second_ name was Paul.

The whole thing of names is a bother. Strawson NEVER USED "Peter" in his writings. It is always "P. F. Strawson". This provoked a little argument when the Queen knighted him.

"Sir P. F."

is not the right thing to utter when 'explicating' who is at a party, so "Sir Peter" was used.

----

"Grice" is a very English surname. It originally means 'pig' (in Scots) or 'grey' (in French).

----

Herbert Grice (Junior)'s father was called "Herbert Grice" (Senior). Hence the name, "Herbert". His other brother was "Derek Grice".

Their mother was Mabel Felton. Both the Feltons and the Grices were wealthy Harborne families.

Grice never had to work in the harbour raising packs of sugar, say.

---

J goes on:

"Considered weak, effeminate, too cerebral, difficult--or something."

Right. Or is _it_ right? In Boston, though, they say,

"pa:k" the "ca:", rather than PaRRk the CARR. But then they think they ARE British (cfr. the Boston Tea Party). ---

The English have been emigrating to the USA for centuries, but they are what they themselves call 'the invisible immigrant'. I lived for a time (one summer or two) in Guilford, Connecticut (don't spread the news), and there was a hot debate in the pages of the local daily, as to where the name of the Towne originated.

Everybody thought it was Guildford in Surrey, with the typical American droppage of the 'd'.

Then, one invisible immigrant to Guilford made some further investigation at the local library and discovered that the first immigrants to Guilford in Connecticut (a charming town which is on the water -- the Guilford marina was my favourite place to bike --) came from EAST GUILFORD north of London, on the Estuary. "It looks pretty much like East Guilford, this town," she added.

But the local residents never accepted the history, and continue to think that it is from "Guildford" in Surrey.

----

I would say that parts of America _are_ very English. Toponymy on the Long Island Sound (seabord) is an example.

-----

J goes on:

"They will read Dewey, James (or Quine for logic/maths types), even Hegelians, but a Toulmin's reserved for like USC students."

Yes. I AM SURPRISED by the load of Brit stuff they have to read, for, say, "English literature". If I were mastering (as per MA) in English in America I would make a point of _NOT_ reading Shakespeare, Marlowe, and all the other minor dramatists of English origin, etc. that they have to digest to call themselves an "English graduate". Ditto for novel. Instead of sticking with the grand novels of Steinbeck, or what have you, they give conferences on:

"Performing bodies in the pre-Victorian trash novels of Elisabetta Curry"

---

Many "literary societies" which cater for the Anglo-philes abound in the USA, with members of the "International Lewis Carroll Society" or the "Virginia Woolf Club" visiting their shrines in the summer.

But then, it is a big country and it caters for anything (everything, as Quine would prefer, with 'substitutional quantification' preferred).

J goes on:

"Some rhetorical/lit. people may have used it (not much AFAIK), but UoA offers a applicable structure---induction, really. Applicable to social science too. Warrants/claims/conclusion. Boring, perhaps.

Well, it was a bit of an 'island'. It has the features of a _textbook_. My favourite chapter, I would think, is the "Probability" chapter which Toulmin did publish, as an article, in Flew, "Conceptual Analysis". At a time Toulmin was considered a 'linguistic botaniser', and reading that chapter by Toulmin is like reading Urmson on 'validity' -- also repr. in Flew. Uses of "I know", "Probably", "it may seem as if", etc.

The reason why Toulmin THEN never stuck with English academia was that it attempted to cover the same ground as Strawson, "Introduction to logical theory". Indeed, I believe Sir Peter reviewed Toulmin's book. Universities were ordering zillions of copies of the Strawson volume for students to have a first grasp of "Logic". So they were NOT going to allow a 'newcomer' as Toulmin was, to sweep Strawson and have the students recite the 'lawyer's' way of arguing in that little book as epitome of what Russell, Wittgenstein, and Quine had said much more abstractedly. Or something.

J goes on:

"But MLA and APA format (Amer. psych. Asso) are boring as well. Really I think that all writing should be APA, or in something like Toulmin's form. Think of all the brainfarts, like plugged. ...APA philosophy? Like Phil. as a social science--tho' would not please the Phil. mavens."

Yes. As I say, I enjoy Toulmin when he analyses common features of discourse. He even has a few things to say that pre-date Grice on 'implicature'. "The weather forecast man, when he says "It will rain" does not really _imply_ that he knows it", or stuff like that.

------ There is a new science, "Argumentation theory", which has made Toulmin the first book to consider. Walton, for example.

I wouldn't know about what style of philosophical writing is best. I read Toulmin as providing clues as to how to interpret what a weather forecast man says, NOT what a philosopher says, because, well, they don't SAY. They _argue_.

Philosophical argument, as Grice knew, can and SHOULD be very abstract. It should be 'metaphysical argument' that counts first. This Grice saw as 'eschatological'. He was planning to write a huge book on that, "From Genesis to Revelations: studies in philosophical methodology". He did write the title for it, but he died (before completing the project).

J notes:

"Actually the later Russell at times sounded Toulminesque, did he not."

The later-day Russell. He married so many times, no? He was an agnostic, British Left sort of type by THAT time. I never understood how many Russells there were. My favourite (in terms of hateful type) is the one portrayed by Nicholas G. in "Tom and Viv", the film with Miranda Richardson, on the life of T. S. Eliot and his English wife. They socialised with Lord Russell a lot, and I think indeed Lord Russell had the hots for Mrs. E.
---

Russell was born in, er, England, er, Wales. Monmouthshire. Where he was born would be regarded, TODAY, a part of Wales. WHEN HE CRIED, "wooooow!" on seeing the light, as a baby, it was part of England. So one may call him an Englishman. But then he was so titled.

His first mistake was possibly to go to King's College and Trinity, Cambridge, rather than Oxford. THAT WOULD HAVE MADEH HIM A TOULMIN.

Cambridge is very hard-science oriented, and perhaps Toulmin was attacking that when suggesting that lawyers should be taken more seriously.

O. T. O. H., the right one usually, Oxford was ALWAYS more on the urbanite side, and they had one lawyer too many.

Recall this was the time (when Toulmin wrote) when at Oxford they were instituting the PPE programme (versus the Lit. Hum. programme that Grice was familiar with). The philosophy-politics-economics programme rather than the 'classics' programme -- litterae humaniores.

J goes on:

"Not merely formal arguments/verification, but...plausibility,persuasion. Philosophy with pie graphs! Or maybe that's political science or economics."

Odd you should say that. The present Prime Minister of England indeed studied philosophy at Wolfson, or Brasenose. He belonged to that P. P. E. programme ("Philosophy, Politics, Economics") hence his current career as Prime Minister. We don't want our prime ministers to be masters in neo-Platonistic approaches to Leibniz monadicism. We want them to be practical types, well imbued with all the informal technicalities (if that's not an oxymoron) of a Toulmin.

J adds:

"Any sort of ...truth criteria are not great for the publishing biz, or Hollywood though. The publishing, entertainment, and US media depends on marketing fantasies, hype, folderol. Fact checking's bad for business."

Yes, plus we never know what a _fact_ is. The Italians call it 'fatto'. It is the past participle of 'do'. "A fact". So, that the sun is shining should NOT be a 'fact' (who makes the sun shine?).

"Fact" is possibly one of the most overused words on television.

--- But then it is hard to find a replacement. I use 'explicature' but I agree it is a mouthful.

J goes on:

"That said, exceptions should be made for the authentic..literatteurs, at least those who've completed like the Joseph Conrad or James Joyce curriculum, and wouldn't call avoir et etre the work of the debbil."

--- That's talking! Of course, Joyce is overrated. He should be restricted to "minor in neo-Anglo-Irish lettres. I never understood all that hype for "Finnegans wake". It is just an Irish drinking song! Joyce had a lot of sexual problems if you've seen the film with Ewan McGregor ("Norah") and even if you haven't seen it. He would masterubate in cinemas in Dublin. And _she_ was possibly some bad influence. Note her surname, Barnacle. She stuck with him.

Conrad is a good example of the 'good immigrant', and thus I sort of dislike him. The 'success-story' type, gone, for me, wrong. Note: he forgot his mother tongue (Polish) altogether, truncated his lovely Polish name, and wrote superficial stuff on an English sailor ("Jim"). I would not count him as "English literature" and would never attend a seminar on "Polish attempts to destroy the Englishness of English literature by writing commercial stuff on marine subject-matters". Or something.

No. Give me E. M. Forster anyday! (Just teasing).