Wittgensteinians
Life in the Post-Analytic World, Given by the Man Who Ended Philosophy As History Knew It

Home » Concerning Wittgenstein's Ideas » Wittgenstein and Language » [Wittrs] Language as a Set of Cue Cards
[Wittrs] Language as a Set of Cue Cards [message #2530] Mon, 30 November 2009 18:11 Go to next message
Sean Wilson is currently offline  Sean Wilson
Messages: 793
Registered: August 2009
Location: Form of Life
Senior Member

... I think I have figured out the best way to describe language. It's a set of cue cards. Imagine a set of complicated cue cards. You are shown a card, and it cues your brain into certain functions and processes. We play the game of "cue cards" when we communicate.  The deck is not stagnant, of course, because new cues can be created out of existing ones. We learn the cues, and we learn the play for forming cues.  


Regards. 

Dr. Sean Wilson, Esq.
Assistant Professor
Wright State University
Personal Website: http://seanwilson.org
SSRN papers: http://ssrn.com/author=596860
Discussion Group: http://seanwilson.org/wittgenstein.discussion.html




==========================================

Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/


[Wittrs] Re: [C] Language as a Set of Cue Cards [message #2532 is a reply to message #2530] Mon, 30 November 2009 19:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Sean Wilson is currently offline  Sean Wilson
Messages: 793
Registered: August 2009
Location: Form of Life
Senior Member

... I don't mean cue cards as in the sense of television (having words). I mean the idea of cue in a social science sense. The idea of "cue" is of symbol or sign that prompts its receiver. Instead of playing Jacks, one plays the game of prompt. Just as in real card games where certain cards do more licentious things, there are cue cards that have special value. The face cards "pin" something particular. The ordinary cards only prompt for resemblance. When one assembles a "hand" and plays it, so to speak, one can offer a terrible play or perhaps be a terrible player (which is only to say that one is challenged by insight).   
 
Regards.

SW



========================================Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/


[Wittrs] Re: Language as a Set of Cue Cards [message #2535 is a reply to message #2530] Mon, 30 November 2009 22:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
SWMirsky is currently offline  SWMirsky
Messages: 188
Registered: August 2009
Senior Member
--- In Wittrs@yahoogroups.com, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@...> wrote:
>
> ... I think I have figured out the best way to describe language. It's a set of cue cards. Imagine a set of complicated cue cards. You are shown a card, and it cues your brain into certain functions and processes. We play the game of "cue cards" when we communicate.  The deck is not stagnant, of course, because new cues can be created out of existing ones. We learn the cues, and we learn the play for forming cues.  
>
>

What strikes me as interesting about this is how it is we make the kinds of cued associations you reference? What does such an association consist of in terms of what the brain does? There is no question that we do make such associations all the time and that a good part of language usage involves doing that. But what is it to do that? What does the brain actually do when it does that? I think an answer to this question will have implications for the philosophical questions as well as the other way round. -- SWM

P.S. By reference I would suggest revisiting my post on my trip up the eastern seaboard when I saw a sign I didn't comprehend and then, abruptly, got it. What happened in my mental life (my subjective experience) that constituted my getting it? Are there mental pictures involved? Representations? And what do such things consist of? How do they work in the brain and/or why do we think we have them and, if we think we have them, must we presume we do?

========================================Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/


[Wittrs] Re: [C] Re: Language as a Set of Cue Cards [message #2540 is a reply to message #2532] Tue, 01 December 2009 20:23 Go to previous message
kirby urner is currently offline  kirby urner
Messages: 349
Registered: August 2009
Location: Portland, Oregon
Senior Member
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@yahoo.com> wrote:
> ... I don't mean cue cards as in the sense of television (having words). I mean the idea of cue in a social science sense. The idea of "cue" is of symbol or sign that prompts its receiver. Instead of playing Jacks, one plays the game of prompt. Just as in real card games where certain cards do more licentious things, there are cue cards that have special value. The face cards "pin" something particular. The ordinary cards only prompt for resemblance. When one assembles a "hand" and plays it, so to speak, one can offer a terrible play or perhaps be a terrible player (which is only to say that one is challenged by insight).
>
> Regards.
>
> SW

I've been meditating (or was it cogitating? -- I should introspect and
find out (smirky smile)) on this metaphor.

Interesting spin on "cue" (thinking "cue ball" or "cue stick").

My first thought was of that joke about the prisoners, where they've
told the jokes enough to give them all numbers, and now just say the
numbers and laugh just the same. How "private language" is that?

The ability to read cues implies a foreground and background, and
meaning, per PI Part 2, is not just about investigating usage
patterns, it's about developing a kind of depth perception, a
sensitivity to grammars (which come and go -- you can watch them
forming, like bubbles).

What does it mean to "follow the action"? That's somewhat required if
one's to espouse about rules and/or defend one's having followed them.
A referee catches errors, faults, misbehaviors, in the context of
knowing what to look for (what the rules are). Likewise in debate,
the judges look for the fallacies, the sleights of hand.

The repeated re-appearance of the cue cards, as if in a tapestry or
intricate machine, sets up all these differences and their grammatical
roles, a form of life, a world (some more magical).

If we're immersed in it long enough, we have opportunities to participate.

Wittgenstein is quite clear however that this is not guaranteed, i.e.
there's always that possibility of being with people one can't find
one's feet with, of being with people one is out of one's depth with.

That would be akin to not being able to pick up on cues, to manifest
an inability to understand. Such is life in the big city, maybe
better luck down the street?

Kirby


--
>>> from mars import math
http://www.wikieducator.org/Martian_Math
========================================Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/


Previous Topic: [Wittrs] What makes for a better language arrangement?
Next Topic: [Wittrs] On the Misuse of OLP
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Thu Feb 22 10:47:40 EST 2018

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02985 seconds