Comments on: Shoppity shoppity http://prepoceros.com/2005/12/19/shoppity-shoppity/ Horn o'plenty. A cornucopia, if you will. Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:59:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5 By: Natalie http://prepoceros.com/2005/12/19/shoppity-shoppity/#comment-97 Natalie Tue, 20 Dec 2005 07:23:17 +0000 http://prepoceros.com/?p=94#comment-97 You're of course more expert in this than I am, but I think the area of overlap is small relative to the broad ranges of both disciplines. If I understand what you're talking about, I would call that area "philosophy of language" (or something similar) and classify it as part of philosophy, but *not* part of linguistics. So yes, there's a connection, but a lot of things are connected, and I don't think this connection is fundamental enough for the two to warrant a joint listing a la Games/Puzzles or Dictionaries/Thesauri or Pregnancy/Childbirth/Parenting. You’re of course more expert in this than I am, but I think the area of overlap is small relative to the broad ranges of both disciplines. If I understand what you’re talking about, I would call that area “philosophy of language” (or something similar) and classify it as part of philosophy, but *not* part of linguistics.

So yes, there’s a connection, but a lot of things are connected, and I don’t think this connection is fundamental enough for the two to warrant a joint listing a la Games/Puzzles or Dictionaries/Thesauri or Pregnancy/Childbirth/Parenting.

]]> By: Ben http://prepoceros.com/2005/12/19/shoppity-shoppity/#comment-95 Ben Mon, 19 Dec 2005 21:28:43 +0000 http://prepoceros.com/?p=94#comment-95 Well, also a lot of modern philosphy thinks that all philosophical questions are really just questions of language (starting with Wittgenstein, probably), and that if we got rid of the problems of language we wouldn't have any philosophical paradoxes. Thus, a lot of modern philosophy consists of doing linguistic work towards these issues. I do think it causes a weird situation of having linguistics under religion. It's an interesting case of two rational connections leading to an irrational one (Phil - Ling, Religion - Phil). Must not be a transitive relation. Well, also a lot of modern philosphy thinks that all philosophical questions are really just questions of language (starting with Wittgenstein, probably), and that if we got rid of the problems of language we wouldn’t have any philosophical paradoxes. Thus, a lot of modern philosophy consists of doing linguistic work towards these issues.

I do think it causes a weird situation of having linguistics under religion. It’s an interesting case of two rational connections leading to an irrational one (Phil - Ling, Religion - Phil). Must not be a transitive relation.

]]> By: Natalie http://prepoceros.com/2005/12/19/shoppity-shoppity/#comment-94 Natalie Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:23:52 +0000 http://prepoceros.com/?p=94#comment-94 I guess I can see the link, as Philosophy --- Cog. Sci. --- Linguistics, but the pairing still seems non-intuitive to me, especially when it requires you to list Linguistics under Religion. Why not Sociology/Linguistics? Linguistics/CogSci? Maybe it wouldn't have been a big enough section. I guess I can see the link, as Philosophy — Cog. Sci. — Linguistics, but the pairing still seems non-intuitive to me, especially when it requires you to list Linguistics under Religion. Why not Sociology/Linguistics? Linguistics/CogSci? Maybe it wouldn’t have been a big enough section.

]]> By: Ben http://prepoceros.com/2005/12/19/shoppity-shoppity/#comment-93 Ben Mon, 19 Dec 2005 08:24:46 +0000 http://prepoceros.com/?p=94#comment-93 Actually, Philosophy and Lingustics are extremely related. If you're interested in why, let me know. Actually, Philosophy and Lingustics are extremely related. If you’re interested in why, let me know.

]]>