My name is Sean Wilson. I'm an assistant professor at Wright State
University. I realize that this is a moderated list. I was hoping you
might inform your members about a new Wittgenstein-centered discussion
group that may interest some of them. if Epistemology wanted to do a
notification of this sort in our group, we would surely welcome it.
Thanks so much and please accept my apologies for this intrusion.
WHAT IS THE GROUP?
The group is for Wittgenstein-learned or inspired people who want to
discuss ANY intellectual idea whatsoever. The premise of the group is
that people who "get Wittgenstein" make for better intellectual
discourse. Of course, we also accept those who are just curious about
Wittgenstein and want to discuss only him. The group spends about
half of its time discussing Wittgenstein and about half discussing a
range of other ideas, mostly in philosophy. (I would like to see the
discussion branch into other fields, such as law, linguistics, and
social science. I'm looking for more participants to help).
WHY IS THIS GROUP DIFFERENT?
Our group's infrastructure is really great. We have an email list that
gets piped into a message board. Any user who sends a message to the
list will have it automatically appear on the board. Conversely,
anyone who replies on the board will have the message go to the list
-- without double posting! Hence, members can participate in the same
discussion using either emails or a message-board format. We also have
a number of web archives that allow one to participate from those
venues as well (see below). Finally, note that the message board
allows you to subscribe only to particular discussion topics. This
would allow you to only receive mails for those issues that concern
you.
WHO CAN BE A MEMBER OF THE GROUP?
Anyone who is inspired by, knowledgeable of, or curious about Ludwig
Wittgenstein -- and who sees Wittgenstein as a polar star in the
intellectual universe. This does not mean that one has to agree with
Wittgenstein's ideas; half-blooded Wittgensteinians are as welcome as
full-blooded. In fact, you can reject Wittgenstein altogether. But
what is key is that you appropriately know of his ideas and find him
to be an important and substantial part of intellectual culture. So
the only people who are excluded from membership are those who dislike
Wittgenstein personally or believe his ideas foolish and irrelevant,
or who don't know anything about his ideas and are content staying
that way.
WHO WOULD WE LIKE TO SEE RECRUITED?
We would like to have more professors from various fields. Ideally,
Wittgenstein-inspired scholars doing work outside philosophy are as
welcome as those doing work inside the field. We would also like to
have people who could contribute messages about conferences and
papers, and relevant news. Good students are of course always welcome.
HOW CAN I JOIN?
There are two ways. You can go to this page and sign up (lower-left
corner): http://www.freelists.org/list/wittrs . Or, you can register
with the message board here: http://seanwilson.org/forum/index.php?t=register&S=72f79b4325322987e4... . Either way, you will get you signed into the group. (NOTE: You do
not need to become a member to read Wittrs. Our archives are public.)
If you need assistance joining, email the group owner:
whoooo26...@yahoo.com.
(To post a message from any of these services requires its own
separate registration. You create a login and a password. You must be
logged in to post. This is separate from the the process of joining
Wittrs. It's an extra step. Please note that Yahoo and Freelist have
more limited utility. See Troubleshooting: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrsts ).
POSTING POLICY:
Wittrs has a posting policy. Contributions must be civil. Talk about
ideas only, not people. To see a more detailed explanation, go here:
http://ludwig.squarespace.com/dbhelp/
QUALITY OF THE PARTICIPANTS:
Wittrs has a wide variety of participants. Some are scholars in the
academy. Some have even authored literary works. But many are just
students or people interested in intellectual ideas. As a result, the
quality of the messages will vary. We suggest you get a feel for who
you might want to discuss with. Not every post needs replied to (let
alone read). Wittrs is committed to the idea that anyone should be
able to post no matter their education or title. Think of Wittrs as a
store: although many items (messages) may be offered for your
consideration, you need only concern yourself with the one(s) good
enough to capture your fancy.
For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
found in Google groups to date.
On Sep 25, 7:51 am, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> found in Google groups to date.
> On Sep 25, 7:51 am, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Intolerance is like racism, dont you see,
> > you should apologize indeed
> > Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
> > Carlos
> > On 23 set, 11:45, Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of
> > > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
> > > Assistant Professor
> > > Wright State University
> > > and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most
> > > asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein.
Elevate = Evolution locates everything validatable as true existence
Its = Information Technology supplies
Use = Universal "sound" epistemology
Could this work????
--------------------------------------------------
From: "archytas" <nwte...@googlemail.com>
Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:49 PM
To: "Epistemology" <epistemology@googlegroups.com>
Subject: [epistemology 10865] Re: New Wittgenstein-Centered Discussion Group
> I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
>> and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
>> overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
>> found in Google groups to date.
>> On Sep 25, 7:51 am, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Intolerance is like racism, dont you see,
>> > you should apologize indeed
>> > Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
>> > Carlos
>> > On 23 set, 11:45, Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of
>> > > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
>> > > Assistant Professor
>> > > Wright State University
>> > > and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most
>> > > asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein.
> Elevate = Evolution locates everything validatable as true existence
> Its = Information Technology supplies
> Use = Universal "sound" epistemology
> Could this work????
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "archytas" <nwte...@googlemail.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:49 PM
> To: "Epistemology" <epistemology@googlegroups.com>
> Subject: [epistemology 10865] Re: New Wittgenstein-Centered Discussion
> Group
> > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> >> and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> >> overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> >> found in Google groups to date.
> >> On Sep 25, 7:51 am, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > Intolerance is like racism, dont you see,
> >> > you should apologize indeed
> >> > Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
> >> > Carlos
> >> > On 23 set, 11:45, Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > > If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of
> >> > > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
> >> > > Assistant Professor
> >> > > Wright State University
> >> > > and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most
> >> > > asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein.
> > Elevate = Evolution locates everything validatable as true existence
> > Its = Information Technology supplies
> > Use = Universal "sound" epistemology
> > Could this work????
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > From: "archytas" <nwte...@googlemail.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:49 PM
> > To: "Epistemology" <epistemology@googlegroups.com>
> > Subject: [epistemology 10865] Re: New Wittgenstein-Centered Discussion
> > Group
> > > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > >> and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > >> overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > >> found in Google groups to date.
> > Elevate = Evolution locates everything validatable as true existence
> > Its = Information Technology supplies
> > Use = Universal "sound" epistemology
> > Could this work????
> > --------------------------------------------------
> > From: "archytas" <nwte...@googlemail.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 17, 2009 2:49 PM
> > To: "Epistemology" <epistemology@googlegroups.com>
> > Subject: [epistemology 10865] Re: New Wittgenstein-Centered Discussion
> > Group
> > > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > >> and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > >> overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > >> found in Google groups to date.
"...the question of why we remain so poor with language and how we
elevate its use ahead of decent doing." - Neil
The assumption of 'poor'ness to me is founded upon the very
subjectivity of language itself. Of course, as to the ‘why’, when the
former is not recognized, it can be 'seen' as being reality itself
when one ruminates and obsesses constantly. One of the better lines in
the quite naïve movie “Crocodile Dundee” could be heard when they were
eating in a hash joint in town and a bag lady came up and asked: “Does
the noise in my head bother you?”. So what one places attention upon
answers the ‘how’ of the issue.
On Oct 17, 6:49 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > found in Google groups to date.
> > On Sep 25, 7:51 am, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Intolerance is like racism, dont you see,
> > > you should apologize indeed
> > > Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
> > > Carlos
> > > On 23 set, 11:45, Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of
> > > > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
> > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > Wright State University
> > > > and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most
> > > > asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein.
The pub once had a backwards clock. Now we just rewind our watches 30
years on entry. Very clever OM - no doubt we will soon be into
Ornamatapeia! Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
justification.
On 18 Oct, 19:02, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "...the question of why we remain so poor with language and how we
> elevate its use ahead of decent doing." - Neil
> The assumption of 'poor'ness to me is founded upon the very
> subjectivity of language itself. Of course, as to the ‘why’, when the
> former is not recognized, it can be 'seen' as being reality itself
> when one ruminates and obsesses constantly. One of the better lines in
> the quite naïve movie “Crocodile Dundee” could be heard when they were
> eating in a hash joint in town and a bag lady came up and asked: “Does
> the noise in my head bother you?”. So what one places attention upon
> answers the ‘how’ of the issue.
> On Oct 17, 6:49 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > > and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > > overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > > found in Google groups to date.
============== Intolerance is like racism, dont you see, you should apologize indeed
Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
Carlos ================ as reaction to my:
If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq. Assistant Professor Wright State University and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein. ============== Now, whether intolerance is like racism, or like flamenco dancing, the reaction was off topic. I did not comment on Dr. Sean Wilson's, Esq. Assistant Professor Wright State University joining this list, but on his invitation to join his Wittgenstein admiration group.
I followed for years on another list Dr. Sean Wilson's, Esq. Assistant Professor Wright State University preaching about Wittgenstein and found to my surprise that Wittgenstein was not the most asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper. His asininity was beaten by several lengths by the elucidations of Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq. Assistant Professor Wright State University.
“… Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
justification.” – Archy
No doubt there is truth in this.
Sadly, the field of knowledge justification is mostly so axiomatically
impaired as to be comparable to attempting complex calculus without
the use of most simple arithmetic symbols.
On Oct 19, 7:23 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> The pub once had a backwards clock. Now we just rewind our watches 30
> years on entry. Very clever OM - no doubt we will soon be into
> Ornamatapeia! Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
> justification.
> On 18 Oct, 19:02, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "...the question of why we remain so poor with language and how we
> > elevate its use ahead of decent doing." - Neil
> > The assumption of 'poor'ness to me is founded upon the very
> > subjectivity of language itself. Of course, as to the ‘why’, when the
> > former is not recognized, it can be 'seen' as being reality itself
> > when one ruminates and obsesses constantly. One of the better lines in
> > the quite naïve movie “Crocodile Dundee” could be heard when they were
> > eating in a hash joint in town and a bag lady came up and asked: “Does
> > the noise in my head bother you?”. So what one places attention upon
> > answers the ‘how’ of the issue.
> > On Oct 17, 6:49 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > > > and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > > > overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > > > found in Google groups to date.
I believe Georges, that once one has accepted the asinine salutation
'Dr' that one loses one's esquire relation through castration rituals
that ensure behaviour in the herd. I once thought the Tractatus
mercifully short and perhaps had some merit as a shaggy-dog story
(largely irrelevant pisswitter with a punchline). Essentially it's
Hamlet with 'something rotten in the State of Denmark' (philosophy)
and the meaningful 'and the rest is silence' (perhaps of that of which
we dare not speak). Investigations is much the same - 'philosophy is
bollox because language bewitches us as we use it and we never move
on'. I've always assumed he spent his life drinking, shagging,
beating children and perhaps spying-recruiting for the Soviet
Paradise, thus having no time to write. His Opus, largely put
together by others, is a masterpiece of 'there is no such thing as a
free lunch', an invitation to Witter on forever. On free lunches, I
was once fed and watered for producing some ethnomethodological
twaddle with him liberally cited. The chicken was particularly good.
On 19 Oct, 21:22, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> “… Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
> justification.” – Archy
> No doubt there is truth in this.
> Sadly, the field of knowledge justification is mostly so axiomatically
> impaired as to be comparable to attempting complex calculus without
> the use of most simple arithmetic symbols.
> On Oct 19, 7:23 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > The pub once had a backwards clock. Now we just rewind our watches 30
> > years on entry. Very clever OM - no doubt we will soon be into
> > Ornamatapeia! Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
> > justification.
> > On 18 Oct, 19:02, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > "...the question of why we remain so poor with language and how we
> > > elevate its use ahead of decent doing." - Neil
> > > The assumption of 'poor'ness to me is founded upon the very
> > > subjectivity of language itself. Of course, as to the ‘why’, when the
> > > former is not recognized, it can be 'seen' as being reality itself
> > > when one ruminates and obsesses constantly. One of the better lines in
> > > the quite naïve movie “Crocodile Dundee” could be heard when they were
> > > eating in a hash joint in town and a bag lady came up and asked: “Does
> > > the noise in my head bother you?”. So what one places attention upon
> > > answers the ‘how’ of the issue.
> > > On Oct 17, 6:49 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
> > > > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very little -
> > > > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I find
> > > > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain so
> > > > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
> > > > > For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a member
> > > > > and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
> > > > > overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I have
> > > > > found in Google groups to date.
> > > > > > Intolerance is like racism, dont you see,
> > > > > > you should apologize indeed
> > > > > > Hey Sean, I apologize for this, your are welcome to this group!
> > > > > > Carlos
> > > > > > On 23 set, 11:45, Georges Metanomski <zg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > If you feel not stupid enough, than you may join the suite of
> > > > > > > Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
> > > > > > > Assistant Professor
> > > > > > > Wright State University
> > > > > > > and improve your stupidity by fatuous admiration of the most
> > > > > > > asinine guy who ever spoiled white paper, to wit Wittgenstein.
> > > > > > > Georges.- Hide quoted text -
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> “… Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
> justification.” – Archy
> No doubt there is truth in this.
> Sadly, the field of knowledge justification is mostly so axiomatically
> impaired as to be comparable to attempting complex calculus without
> the use of most simple arithmetic symbols.
> On Oct 19, 7:23 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> The pub once had a backwards clock. Now we just rewind our watches 30
>> years on entry. Very clever OM - no doubt we will soon be into
>> Ornamatapeia! Attention attraction is little understood in knowledge
>> justification.
>> On 18 Oct, 19:02, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > "...the question of why we remain so poor with language and how we
>> > elevate its use ahead of decent doing." - Neil
>> > The assumption of 'poor'ness to me is founded upon the very
>> > subjectivity of language itself. Of course, as to the ‘why’, when the
>> > former is not recognized, it can be 'seen' as being reality itself
>> > when one ruminates and obsesses constantly. One of the better lines in
>> > the quite naïve movie “Crocodile Dundee” could be heard when they were
>> > eating in a hash joint in town and a bag lady came up and asked: “Does
>> > the noise in my head bother you?”. So what one places attention upon
>> > answers the ‘how’ of the issue.
>> > On Oct 17, 6:49 am, archytas <nwte...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > > I tried Sean's group, but found myself spammed - not intentionally
>> > > from the group. I rather like Wittgenstein and he wrote very >> > > little -
>> > > others generally spoiled the white paper. After a few insights I >> > > find
>> > > myself utterly uninterested except in the question of why we remain >> > > so
>> > > poor with language and how we elevate its use ahead of decent doing.
>> > > On 25 Sep, 20:53, ornamentalmind <ornamentalm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > For the record, I researched Sean and his group...even became a >> > > > member
>> > > > and have read many posts there. Even though I do not embrace their
>> > > > overall philosophy, their presentations are the most coherent I >> > > > have
>> > > > found in Google groups to date.
|
