the problem of language - of meaning
is the problem of the logic of discourse
'language' as such is best seen as the name of
languages -
common language - ordinary language - is in general
a logical nightmare
what you find in ordinary language is strands of
various ontologies operating apparently together
and harmoniously
this before reflection
i.e. an individual's description of another -
may involve i.e. - strands of a behaviouristic analysis -
and - physicalist views - and even with this
phenomenalistic strands - perhaps in the mix materialism
and spiritualistic ontologies - even indeed a good dose
of scepticism -
conflict over description - conflict - that is with
another's (set of) descriptions - is primarily an issue of -
which ontology - and hence - which onto-language is to be
adopted -
short of a decision - to be clear on which language or set
of languages to adopt in the circumstances - there will be
dispute over meaning - perhaps even incomprehension - on a
bad night violence
the issue I suggest is never that of meaning -
rather which meanings are to be employed - and by
implication - which ontology (ies) - metaphysic(s) -
are at issue
the point is not that people can't understand each other -
rather - that to do so - they need to be as we say
'on the same wave length'
hence - it seems that those who share the same -
or should I say similar metaphysics are more likely
to hit the same or similar note -
or - they can - perhaps without as much work as
those coming from divergent meta positions
nevertheless - reaching - or understanding common
ground - and being able to find common language
is never beyond possibility
however it is not just a matter of good will -
you need to have an open metaphysics -
to accommodate closed positions
perhaps an understanding that there is no one language -
no definite description -
that finally what we truly have in common is that we
don't know - and don't know each other
p.s
the truth about ordinary language is that it's a level
of meaning is faint - i.e. what is being said is to be
defined - looked into - meaning here - by and large - is
indeterminate
and to some extent this is how it should be - it is not
a failing - a fault -
we begin in obscurity - or non-clarity -
it is generally the emergence of conflict (ontological /
metaphysical) at this level which leads to clarification -
particularity -
or just a great tolerance of life - in a strange few
