3 ms·
Honestly, define language first because the word it thrown around and used sloppily with no one taking the time to reflect on it. (I shouldn't be surprised, of
by bobthechef 10y ago
Honestly, define language first because the word it thrown around and used sloppily with no one taking the time to reflect on it. (I shouldn't be surprised, of course, by the willingness of HN posters to pontificate on subjects they have not studied or comprehended in any meaningful way. The Emory professor is just embarrassing to read.)
This topic has been studied for a very long time and a rudimentary understanding of concept, signifier, denotation, etc, would cut the bullshit drastically. Donald Davidson, Karl Buehler and Karl Popper are contemporary contributors to the subject. Frege. Aristotle. Tarski. I can keep going.
- panglott 10y agoNo wonder people may assume the philosophy of language is outdated, if Aristotle is a contemporary contributor ;)
- joe_the_user 10y agoThe article is something of a Rorschach blot - mention language and consciousness and a hundred ill-defined pet theories are going to come of peoples mouth, or out of their fingertips onto the comment section. Not that these pet theories are necessarily bad. Usually they're variations on existing frameworks but with lots of things left uninvestigated because each theory is developed just enough to satisfy the individual.