floored a horse
Previous page12

    Software soft in relation to hardware but would not software be hardwired in relation to Wittgenstein rules dissolve in inexplicable solution of mutualities constitute shared form of life?

    Strictly controlled operation of algorithm in relation to follow rules as accounted for by Wittgenstein and Duchamp treasured and appreciated as in games of sharing. Make no sense but statistically, which does not make sense since counting heads.

    Consider Duchamp Lazy Hardware bookshop window display with lady-with-faucet-on-her-thigh meditation on hardware and software.

  • [572]

    Rules of grammar student of foreign language meet manners of speaking. If rules to follow then manners to relate to. Wittgenstein considered maths matter of manners. Manners and mannerisms are style. All he really cared about.

  • [573]

    Tractatus repudiated bad manners excess in logic. Theory from theorein to watch not by way of overview as afforded by abstraction but closer to subtleties of particular case such as afforded by some chosen example.

  • [579]

    Passage from logic to grammar from notion of there being underpinnings to notion of making sense underway. Logic paradoxical game of controlling indefinite business of rulers. Is not logician inclined to teach while grammarian rather disposed for learning?

  • [580]

    Ethics and grammar non-hierarchical neither pope nor universal grammar more than examples of pious among pious and grammar among grammars.

  • [581]

    Would systematic inquery be in line with Wittgenstein interest in grammar? No, things  be taken care of in passing since how happen. But in style of course.

  • [582]

    Distinction of school grammar rule and example thereof untenable since rules are already examples. His remarks pass clear of that division by ricocheting all kinds of ways as for example: Why can't we imagine a grey-hot? Remarks on Color p 216. Re-mark is a loop escape return of rotation by un-screwing itself. Holds for Duchamp certainty-of-uncertainty as well. Both blundered once: Wittgenstein in Lecture on Ethics 1929 and Duchamp in The Creative Act 1957. By telling what they were doing. Cannot be but nonsense of nonsense of their respective undertaking.

  • [584]

    Dialects mutually intelligible languages mutually un-intelligible. Wittgenstein philosophy of language best conceived of as philosophy of dialect. His 'short dictionary for the use of pupils in Alpine elementary schools' obviously so and Tractatus suggests a mutually intelligible language across all language barriers. Means translation of it from one language to another is no translation of Tractatus language.

  • [585]

    Illusionist steer attention away from trick of trick. Still fascinated by wonder it works. Wittgenstein remark trick of magician work wonder. Something up the sleeve not necessarily known to either party but acknowledged. Artists enticed to explain their trade doomed to fail this way or that cf Dylan notion of 'disease of conceit'.

  • [587]

    Watch your step! precise language consumed in action nothing to ponder about but react upon. To be clear something else. Clear language is riddle take nothing else than some serious waiting for things to dawn.

Previous page12