Morpho-Logy

It may be argued that if Heidegger is right about 'philo-sophy' NOT being the love of wisdom (that would be "sopho-philos", rather), but the wisdom of love, I could well argue that 'morphemics' is misused by linguists.

Morphology is not the science of 'forms'.

Rather, morpho-logy is the 'logical form'. Logike morphe.

The idea is to deal with the

matter-form distinction.

Which is Aristotelian in nature.

A study of the history of logic should proceed from Aristotle's 'eidos' and 'morphe', via Occam, to Grice.

Occam wisely noted that the language of thought (mentalese, 'sermo interioris') would NOT involve 'cases' (like Latin). Those are features of the 'grammatical form' (cfr. morphology as wrongly understood). Logical forms do not display cases. They are abstract, and they serve a point in the student of an ascription of the mechanisms which a 'signifying' creature displays.

-----

"Logical form" is thus best understood not as the opposite of "informal logic" which does not exist, but as the contrasting side to _material_ logic.

--- which possibly does not exist, either!