|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
In this essay, I’m going to argue that ostensive definition has its limitations. By using components from Benjamin’s book Philosophy & This Actual World, he uses pragmatic arguments against the Cartesian perspective of language. He then argues that delivering an account of such an issue, such as the limitations of ostensive definition, is part of language itself. ... ” (7) Benjamin makes a pragmatic point of view towards language described by the Cartesian theory, taking on perspectives of both sides, the position of both agent and agent/spectator. Even though Benjamin is able to argue that ostensive language is an important element towards communication, he still realizes it’s limitations, because after all language makes you a creature of common sense. There are still limitations with ostensive definition, and that Benjamin concludes that ostensive definition is too limited as a method of communication.
Using ostensive language allows one to extend the knowledge and expression of comprehension between others. Ostensive language involves motions and objects to describe something that can not be described by actual words themselves. ... Benjamin enforces ostensive language with his arguments towards the Cartesian theory. ... ”(9) Benjamin’s pragmatic view towards the Cartesian theory of language is found in Philosophy and This Actual World (28-36). ... Benjamin portrays the Cartesian theory of language (being taken on from a spectator view) that language would have to be self-taught. It would also have to be shared experiences for the same meaning of the language to be shared between others. By taking on the Cartesian theory of language I will believe everything is false. ... If the Cartesian is to assume everything false, then how could there possibly be language? ... How could she differentiate the language shared between two people when the Cartesian method involves being singular and with one self-unable to have a concrete base?
Approximate Word count = 1446
Approximate Pages = 5.8
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|