Missing posts / members X
Philosophy Forums was hacked on September 6th. Due to the hacker, everything between July 24th and September 6th is permanently missing. Unfortunately, automated backups had to be turned off months ago because they were crashing the server. We're evaluating how to stop this from happening again. You may be able to find your own posts in a google cache to re-post them, if you want to.
How to avoid solipsism on interpretation?
Title How to avoid solipsism on interpretation?
Message Text Meaning, reference, speech acts... When reading I always get the feeling that I did not get right what the writer wanted to say or that I am concluding something that the writer did not. Alright, then. I start to read something about hermeneutics, but the problem still exists: again, I will have to interpretate the text that tells me how to interpretate. Does this leads me to solipsism? How do I know if I know well the rules of the use of words in the philosophic language-game? When reading a text do we always undestand what we want or there's a way to avoid it? If the right one is the latter, should we try to figure out what the text wanted to say or what the writer wanted to say?

P.S.: I apologize for the eventual grammar mistakes I have commited and my poor english speaking.
Category Philosophy of Language
  • 0/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
0/5 based on 0 votes. The median rating is 0.
Views 117 views. Averaging 0 views per day.
Submission Date Jun 12, 2006 - 7:51 PM

Previous Topic | Next Topic