IN
Defense of NONSENSE if not no-sense-at-all.
“Wittgenstein had an
enormous effect on [Bertrand]Russell.
First Russell
thought Wittgenstein had a new
kind of
sensibility.[Witt] gave Russell the sense that he really
knew something
incommunicable, that there was some
thing he was trying to
get at, that Russell was not seeing it.
As a result of these
interactions, Russell actually gave up
mathematical logic. Wittgenstein convinced him that his
old ways of doing
things were wrong. Russell said that he
couldn't quite understand what Wittgenstein was saying,
but he felt in his bones that he must be right. That's the
kind
of effect that Wittgenstein had on people.”
Rebecca Goldstein.
Goedel and the Nature
of Mathematical Truth.
IN
my dreams, wittgensteinian-like, I urge
bertrand russell terriers
terrified to ease their
grip on mathematical canny doggone logically
positive cynicism, not that
there’s any thing wrong with THAT
but that they might push away from childish flings as merely
necessary but insufficient like words are as inadequate
as students
tell me tattooed so to
speak from head to toes with images & other
signs & symbols of our
bawdy languages.
You can understand
Gödel's saying, as he's quoted
saying to the
mathematician Menger one night when
they were walking home
together from one of the
meetings of the positivists, something like: "The more
I think about language the less possible it seems to me
that we ever understand one another."
In
computer-programming talk: program-language looks like
gobble
de gook to inhabitants of User-Friendly
World, might
as
well be glossolalia, squeaking in tongues of angles to user-friendly
Flatlanders
as far as program- languageing is concerned:
babble if
not
Babel when a deep
program-language way of talking leaks
out,
collapsed,
conflated & spilling across the
screen of my tectonic
platonic
monitor.
“MU!” I mutter, descriptively. “It’s nonsense to
utter Non Sense!
This
will never do.” As if a sphere pancaked
into a circle presumed
to
serve as Representative re-presenting
the great state of Sphereville
and
we allowed it, too, without acknowledging our cognitive dissonance. .
Of what we cannot speak
thereof we must be silent."
It's ambiguous. It could
mean that all facts can be said
and they can be said
clearly, or it could mean that there
are facts that are out
there, but our language is not adequate
for expressing them:
that our language is leaving out chunks
of reality. If we try to
express the unsayable in language, we'll
violate the rules of
language and commit nonsense.
“mystical”
& “mystery” & “myopia”: all 3
from Indo European mu—
imitative
of inarticulate sounds: mum, mumbling,
muttering
variations
on silent, dumb, mute; Gk – muein: to close the lips;
in
other words THAT which is unsayable is merely unsayable
&
mystery. And to try to say what can’t be said articulately is to utter
nonsense,
but important nonsense.
***
I
can’t feed my self nor get self satisfaction despite my ambidexterity
on
the one hand and on the other it makes no never minding or
self-compliance;
an urbane myth and no legend: I get no satisfying ultimate
outcome
or emerging phenomenal news of closure: all done & all is one &
one
is all a lone & ever more shall be so perfect for crying out loud.
My cultural luggage
explains how-it-is I can’t talk the talk & not
even close to walking the walk forgetabout it: walk&talk,
can’t
do both no matter how peri-pathetic
my daze of old togas & sandals
in the groves of academe: Ah, but does it LOOK like a duck goes in
one ear and out the other.
I can say it but not play
it again same: I am always able to say more
than I can see, blame more
than I know for sure imagine what as
never been or will be but
never feed my self: I am retarded in
that way deficient &
insufficient, no self-sustaining system but
dependent on the Law of
the Occluded Muddle and the kindness
& kinship of other
alone rangers. Inter Alios & Inter
Alia: between
& betwixt other things
and persons not with standing them.
No comments:
Post a Comment