Word and Object

Word and Object header image

Bukowski

January 23rd, 2008 · 3 Comments ·

Charles Bukowski recently released (posthumously, that is), a new book of poetry entitled The Pleasures of the Damned. It was poorly reviewed by somebody named David L. Ulin in the Los Angeles Times (Nov. 25, 2007). Mr. Ulin states, “it’s impossible not to ask some hard questions about his status and whether it is deserved. […]

→ 3 Comments

Wittgenstein’s Sensations

December 4th, 2007 · 4 Comments ·

At §290 of the Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein avers I do not “identify my sensation by criteria.” I would need a set of function predicates in order to do so, i.e. the sensation is x only if f (x) is true; in other words, f properly can be attributed of (or to) x. One way to […]

→ 4 Comments

Wittgenstein on “Knowing That,” “Knowing How” and “Being Able to Do”

November 9th, 2007 · 1 Comment ·

At §150 of the Philosophical Investigations, Wittgenstein invites us to consider three separate concepts: 1. {“knowing that”}; 2. {“knowing how”}; and 3. {“being able to do”}. Wittgenstein states their “grammar” is “evidently closely related.” Wittgenstein has a propensity to put forth “stalking horses” as a way to delineate his position more sharply. And, frequently, he […]

→ 1 Comment

Specificity of Discourse

April 14th, 2007 · 3 Comments ·

Don Imus rightly has been condemned, and then fired, for his use of the phrase “nappy-headed hos” with reference to the Rutgers’ women’s basketball team. I think Mr. Imus is an execrable person – not for his predictably “shock-jock” views, but rather: (a) for not being able to speak properly. He’s a mumbler, and in […]

→ 3 Comments

The Phenomenological Proust

December 24th, 2006 · 5 Comments ·

What is the world’s most boring novel? Easy! It’s Swann’s Way, the first volume of Remembrance of Things Past, by Marcel Proust. The main reason why is, nothing happens. The narrator (Proust) waits for his mother to kiss him goodnight. Everybody sits around waiting for dinner at the Verdurins. It’s raining, so the narrator (Proust, […]

→ 5 Comments

The Incidence of “Brain Fever” in The Brothers Karamazov

November 13th, 2006 · 3 Comments ·

Dostoyevsky’s characters frequently suffer from something he calls “brain fever.” Pulcheria Alexandrovna Raskolnikova, Raskolnikov’s clueless mother, has it in Crime and Punishment; in fact she dies from it.  Arkady Makarovich Dolgoruky has it, for a while, in The Adolescent.  So does Nicolas Vsevolodovich Stavrogin, in The Possessed.  Then there is Rogojin, in The Idiot; not […]

→ 3 Comments

Why Did Jesus Kiss the Grand Inquisitor?

November 1st, 2006 · 6 Comments ·

In his recent lectures on Dostoyevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, Hubert Dreyfus asks this question of his audience, primarily comprising lower-division students at U.C. Berkeley.  Through the electronic magic of pod-casting, I surreptitiously have been listening to Professor Dreyfus for the last six months or so, as I drive to and from the studio.  My dog, […]

→ 6 Comments

Speech Acts with Legal Consequences

October 25th, 2006 · 1 Comment ·

This is yet another note precipitated by re-reading J. L. Austin’s famous paper, “A Plea for Excuses,” see previous post. As I described, Austin originated the concept of “speech acts,” which are the things one does, or accomplishes, by uttering words. Examples are activities such as promising, commanding, evaluating, describing, etc. Now, there’s a significant […]

→ 1 Comment

Legal “Excuses”

October 24th, 2006 · No Comments ·

I was thinking some more about J. L. Austin (see previous post, “Comments on ‘A Plea for Excuses,’” and it occurred to me that lawsuits, and litigation, are the ultimate example of an aberration, something going wrong. Now, I dislike lawyers as much as the next guy, but stay with me here, like Dante with […]

→ No Comments

Comments Regarding “A Plea for Excuses”

October 23rd, 2006 · 4 Comments ·

Our subject today is a paper by a philosopher named J. L. Austin. Austin was a professor at Oxford. He actually died comparatively recently, in 1960. He is not to be confused with another English philosopher named John Austin, who was a famous scholar of jurisprudence, or I suppose we could say a “jurisprude,” back […]

→ 4 Comments