Aggregating transdisciplinary media for an increasingly interconnected world.
-
The right method of philosophy would be this. To say nothing except what can be said, i.e., the propositions of natural science, i.e., something that has nothing to do with philosophy: and then always, when someone else wished to say something metaphysical, to demonstrate to him that he had given no meaning to certain signs in his propositions. This method would be unsatisfying to the other – he would not have the feeling that we were teaching him philosophy – but it would be the only strictly correct method.
– Ludwig Wittgenstein: Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (via fuckyeahphilosophy)Source: fuckyeahphilosophy
-
Douglas Hofstadter on Analogy as the Core of Cognition (Stanford Presidential Lecture Series in the Humanities and Arts)
Source: fuckyeahphilosophy
-
this ain't livin': Language Matters: Why I Say 'Climate Change,' Not 'Global Warming' →
There’s another reason, though, which is that language can be highly weaponized. If we use weaponized terms, even if we don’t use them in a weaponized way, we play into opposing arguments. The climate change versus global warming language is a great example. There are people who want to deny that climate change is occurring. From their perspective, the term “global warming” is like manna because it allows them to say “but how can you say there’s global ‘warming’ when the Northeast just experienced an unprecedented winter storm and it was really cold.”
Source: se-smith
-
[Flash 9 is required to listen to audio.]
From the podcast:
“Where humans left the apes in the dust, however, was in social skills, according to Michael Tomasello of the Max Planck Institute.
He claims in a follow-up in The New York Times Magazine that our culture, language, economy and sophisticated tools exist because of our tendency for “collective cognition”.
Comparing children and chimps, Tomasello found that humans recognize and commit to group tasks, whereas chimps have no such expectation of others.
Apes communicate to get others to do what they want, but children talk or gesture to share information.”If we can assume that the human brain is hardwired for information-sharing and group-mindedness, would this provide an insight into the debate concerning the telos of human language? There are those who argue that language serves as a means to mutual and intersubjective understanding. Does this research on “collective cognition” give credence to this argument?
-
I asked the zebra,
–
Are you black with white strips?
Or white with black strips?
And the zebra asked me,
Are you good with bad habits?
Or are you bad with good habits?
Are you noisy with quiet times?
Or are you quiet with noisy times?
Are you happy with sad days?
Or are you sad with happy days?
Are you neat with some sloppy ways?
Or are you sloppy with some neat ways?
And on and on and on and on
And on and on he went.
I’ll never ask a zebra
About stripes
Again.Shel Silverstein
via infinitebutterflies : kissmytoes : smileawhileforme : happythings : caughtinthemoment : qomaspeakup : neonvillage : petitefrancaise
Source: iamonlyamaid
