> This theory is self-refuting. Wittgenstein forms this theory about
>language,
yet claimed that theories were meaningless.
Boy, that Wittgenstein was a real idiot! What could he have been
thinking?
> Also, he said we are just playing an
>arbitrary language game, but he himself is implying that he exists
>outside of
>this arbitrary game, by describing an objective reality that there
>exists a
>language game. So, he's exempting himself from his own rules about
>theories and
>language games.
Damn! He says language is arbitrary and meaningless. Yet he uses
language to say that! What a paradox! What a dilemma! How can it be
resolved?
> He cannot escape the implicit assumption that there exists an
>objective reality and language is for describing that reality.
He is a prisoner of your mind!
Richard Brodie RBrodie@brodietech.com +1.206.688.8600
CEO, Brodie Technology Group, Inc., Bellevue, WA, USA
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie
Do you know what a "meme" is?
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/meme.htm
>