In this course, I find several papers are pretty interesting since they provide some perspectives of language that are usually ignored by people. For, example, Putnam's Paper addressing the reference of names, where he provide this model of the twin earth which, I take to be a precise demonstration of the social or institutional perspective of how can a word to be understand as being indexical and at the same time as a rigid designator. A name is indexical since the reference of its extension is not fixed by any application in an individual level, rather an institution is required for establish a paradigm that determines the extension of that name. Then, once a name is determined institutionally, it can be a rigid designator, which would have a fixed reference in all possible world.His account captures two features that I have taken to be most important to the language, first, extension of names varies under different context, which means that language can evolve or at least mutate. On the other hand, at a specific given period, a name that is institutionally fixed is able to refer to a specific entity in any given circumstance. I think this account it insightful since it employs a way that can state clearly what would the core of language be like.
On the other hand, the topic about slurs really shows what are some application of philosophy regard common use of language. and various accounts are provided for that matter, some thinks that slurs are semantically different from neutral words while other think slurs are different semantically yet having the same reference with their neutral counterpart. Some believes that slurs and slurring uses are not intrinsic parts of those words rather determining some words are slurs or are involved in slurring uses requires contextual examination. Overall, I regard that this discussion of slurs is pretty bizarre for me, showing me more of how philosophy can be used. Yet moreover, I think the use of slurs can not only be analyzed analytically (statically), meaning here as examining as a fixed given fact, it can also be analyzed dynamically, which requires more work of observing. This discussion of slurs mirrors my understanding of philosophy as being a constant dynamic struggle that occasionally cause sparks that can help to ignite and preserve the fire of humanity.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHey, I agree with you that Putnam's paper and his semantic externalism captures many important and somewhat understated features of language. That was probably one of my favorite readings as well, and it ought to continue to be drawn from and engaged with in the field. I also totally share your sentiment about the topic of slurs. At first, it seemed to me like such a marginal subclass of language that it was odd to study it under a microscope in order to create ad hoc theories that deal with slurs specifically. Since then, I realized that the literature on the topic actually does bring out the apparently problematic nature of slurs quite well. Anyway, I enjoyed reading your reflection and best wishes in your future endeavors.
ReplyDelete