Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that We have gone astray in our understanding of how rules operate if we accept that interpretation is fundamental to meaning

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Accepting interpretation as fundamental leads to an infinite regress of interpretations (as Wittgenstein notes: we can give one interpretation after another, each standing behind the last)
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Such an infinite regress entails radical linguistic indeterminacy
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Radical linguistic indeterminacy is an absurd consequence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.