The Grice Club

Welcome

The Grice Club

The club for all those whose members have no (other) club.

Is Grice the greatest philosopher that ever lived?

Search This Blog

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

The Pirot Walk, The Pirot Talk

Grice is following a line first drawn by Russell and Carnap as he explicitly acknowledges in "How Pirots Karulize Elatically: Some Simpler Ways"

"i. A pirot can be said to

potch
of some obble o

as

(a) fang or as

(b) feng.

ii. Also:

to

cotch of some
obble o,

as

(a) fang or
(b) feng;

iii. or to

cotch of one obble o and

anotherobble o'

as being

fid to one another."

---

In symbols

---

For (i)

(a)

(Ex)(Ey).Px & Oy & POTCH(x, y, fang)

(b)

Ex.Ey.Px & Oy & POTCH(x, y, feng)

Again, for (ii)

(a)

(Ex)(Ey).Px & Oy & COTCH(x, y, fang)

(b)

Ex.Ey.Px & Ox & COTCH(x, y, feng)


And for

(iii)

ExEy.Px & Oz & Oy & COTCH(x, FID(y,z))

--- That's the syntax level.

Next comes the _semantics_ or interpretation:

Grice:

"Let's say that pirots (as Russell and Carnap conceived them)
inhabit a (fantasy) world of obbles ['material' objects].

"To potch
is something like to perceive"

"To cotch something like to think."

"'Feng' and 'fang' are
possible descriptions, much
like our adjectives."

"Finally, "fid" is a
possible relation between obbles."

---

In the (iii) stage Grice is alreay providing some symbolisation for 'content' internalisation. The perceiver or cognitive subject perceives or cognises two objects, x, y, as holding a 'relation' of some type.

There is a higher level pirots can reach when the object of their potchings and cotchings is not so much objects but states of affairs.

It's then that the

truth-functional operators will be brougth to existence

-- conjunction

cotching (p & q)

-- disjunction

cotching (p v q)

-- conditional

cotching (p --> q)

Before that, a pirot will be able to reject a content, refuse-thinking

cothing (- p)

-- Etc.

Once the pirot perceives ANOTHER pirot, the reciprocals get more complicated.

A pirot will 'cotch' that a pirot !-judges that p.

And if this pirot is co-operative, he will honour his partner's goal by adopting it temporarily:

POTCH (x (Potch (y, !p)) --> POTCH (x, !p).

Etc.

But by then, it's hardly _simpler_ ways. Etc.

No comments:

Post a Comment