ordinary language
philosophy, a loosely structured philosophical movement holding that the
significance of concepts, including those central to traditional philosophy –
e.g., the concepts of truth and knowledge – is fixed by linguistic practice.
Philosophers, then, must be attuned to the actual uses of words associated with
these concepts. The movement enjoyed considerable prominence chiefly among
English-speaking philosophers between the mid-1940s and the early 1960s. It was
initially inspired by the work of Wittgenstein, and later by John Wisdom,
Gilbert Ryle, Norman Malcolm, and J. L. Austin, though its roots go back at
least to Moore and arguably to Socrates. Ordinary language philosophers do not
mean to suggest that, to discover what truth is, we are to poll our fellow
speakers or consult dictionaries. Rather, we are to ask how the word ‘truth’
functions in everyday, nonphilosophical settings. A philosopher whose theory of
truth is at odds with ordinary usage has simply misidentified the concept.
Philosophical error, ironically, was thought by Wittgenstein to arise from our
“bewitchment” by language. When engaging in philosophy, we may easily be misled
by superficial linguistic similarities. We suppose minds to be special sorts of
entity, for instance, in part because of grammatical parallels between ‘mind’
and ‘body’. When we fail to discover any entity that might plausibly count as a
mind, we conclude that minds must be nonphysical entities. The cure requires
that we remind ourselves how ‘mind’ and its cognates are actually used by
ordinary speakers.
Wednesday, May 20, 2020
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment