2007-01-23 05:22:53 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
To be a bit more specific: Is there anything whereof 'one cannot speak'. For Wittgenstein, it was the big questions - life's meaning, God, - that were beyond words, and could only be expressed through a mystical silence....what do you think?
2007-01-23 05:39:00 · update #1
I find it more of a challenge to express emotion and profound thought through words.
I however channel that into my pursuit of oil painting.
I live by standards that perhaps are silent to those around me but in turn scream beauty to the universe.
2007-01-23 05:33:37 · answer #1 · answered by someone 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As the old saying goes, the philosopher does not say neither yes or no, nor true or false, but that "we must distinguish". Wittgenstein's theories were heavily centered on the utility of language and the necessity of language to express meaning to others. Outside of language we are lost in expression. On this we can say that other forms of expression, such as art, would be void without some form of 'speaking out' to others. At the same time a smile or tear more often transmits to us a meaning that words no longer can express. In this light we can say this supposition is false.
On the other hand we only understand that which know. If someone has lived in a desert and never seen a tree in their life, they cannot form the image of a tree and may not understand other concepts such as wood, leaf, etc. When someone tries to explain something to us we have never seen, they attempt to utilize familiar things to us and so we can make a composite of these images to 'see' what the other person is talking about. So in relation to many of the abstract notions to which you and Wittgenstein refer are things that are, tangibly speaking, unknown to us, and in this case we could say the supposition is true.
I find that there is a difference in knowing something and understanding it. I may not entirely comprehend a person but I do know 'human being'. In the same respect I may not comprehend God as he may exist, but I can understand the concept of God and the existence of God in as much as my intellect permits. Hence I may speak of God but with a limited ability, and only in proportion to things known to me.
2007-01-23 11:04:50 · answer #2 · answered by ergo sum 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True!
The opening lines of the Tao Te Ching, the ancient mystical book of Taoism, are,
'The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao,
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.'
Mystics throughot the ages have resorted to all sorts of ways to try to communicate their understandings. None has succeeded. The best one can hope for is to point the way so that another being can find the Truth for him or herself.
This is the reason for all the Koans and strange practices of Zen, to drive the trainee out of conceptual thought and into the heart of the mystery directly.
It is the ultimate frustration of the seer and the mystic. To have this wonderful 'experience' , to wish so dearly to share it. Yet there are no words to speak it.
There is a transmission! Mystics of all religions and no religion find ways to lead their followers to insight.
It's a fascinating study. I wish you luck with it.
Jon C
2007-01-23 06:20:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
This isn't an absolute, it's more of a practical advice type of thing, as Brunno said (by the way is your name supposed to reference Silvie and Brunno?).
Basically, if you talk about something you know nothing about, nobody will listen to you, if you remain silent and listen you will learn, and then be able to speak.
2007-01-23 05:38:21 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
False. The illiterate person through his speech can identify why he/she is illiterate, and by so doing, indirectly influence the creation of amending actions to increase literacy. Identifying the sources of ignorance without observing the ignorant is difficult.
2007-01-23 05:28:07 · answer #5 · answered by Ilich 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True. And why? Because: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt" - Chinese proverb.
2007-01-23 05:35:41 · answer #6 · answered by shades of Bruno 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have nothing to say on the subject and therefore I must remain silent.
2007-01-23 05:30:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes when one can speak it is best, still, to remain silent.
2007-01-23 05:37:58 · answer #8 · answered by ___ 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True in my humble opinion.
2007-01-23 06:45:53 · answer #9 · answered by Erina♣Liszt's Girl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
True. If you don't what your talking about then you really shouldn't be talking about it. Am i right?
2007-01-23 05:38:33 · answer #10 · answered by Becky 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋