[was: RE: [PEN-L:30615] Re: Re: Re: Personalities and the List]
Ravi wrote:
>the philosopher quine i think (jks can correct me, that is if he is
still being nice to me ;-)), or perhaps one of the logical positivists,
suggested that we should do away with ordinary language and use a new
pseudo-mathematical language that would make meaningless debates
impossible (by not permitting the _expression_ of ambiguities and
self-contradictions, etc) and force some form of responsible analysis.<
Isn't that kind of thinking a basis for a lot of the meaningless jargon that pollutes academic life?
------------------------
Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxx & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
- [PEN-L:30626] RE: Re: academic lingo, Devine, James Fri 27 Sep 2002, 20:52 GMT
- [PEN-L:30627] Re: RE: Re: academic lingo, joanna bujes Fri 27 Sep 2002, 21:05 GMT
- [PEN-L:30629] Re: RE: Re: academic lingo, Ian Murray Fri 27 Sep 2002, 21:33 GMT
- [PEN-L:30624] intraestablishmentarian debate about Iraq Attack, Devine, James Fri 27 Sep 2002, 20:29 GMT
- [PEN-L:30623] academic lingo, Devine, James Fri 27 Sep 2002, 20:12 GMT
- [PEN-L:30625] Re: academic lingo, joanna bujes Fri 27 Sep 2002, 20:41 GMT
- [PEN-L:30622] RE: Momentum?, Devine, James Fri 27 Sep 2002, 20:11 GMT
- [PEN-L:30630] Re: RE: Momentum?, Dan Scanlan Fri 27 Sep 2002, 21:48 GMT
- [PEN-L:30631] Re: Re: RE: Momentum?, ravi Fri 27 Sep 2002, 21:54 GMT