In article <Apr.13.00.08.33.1993.28409@athos.rutgers.edu> kilroy@gboro.rowan.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie) writes: > >There is no way out of the loop.  Oh contrer mon captitan!  There is a way.  Certainly it is not by human reason.  Certainly it is not by human experience. (and yet it is both!)  To paraphrase Sartre, the particular is absurd unless it has an infinite reference point.  It is only because of God's own revelation that we can be absolute about a thing.  Your logic comes to fruition in relativism.   > >"At the core of all well-founded belief, lies belief that is unfounded." >                                                    -- Ludwig Wittgenstein  Ah, now it is clear.  Ludwig was a desciple of Russell. Ludwig's fame is often explained by the fact that he spawned not one but two significant movements in contemporary philosophy. Both revolve around Tractatus Logico-Philosphicus ('21) and Philosophical Investigation ('53).  Many of Witt's comments and implicit conclusions suggest ways of going beyond the explicit critique of language he offers.  According to some of the implicit suggestions of Witt's thought, ordinary language is an invaluable resource, offering a necessary framework for the conduct of daily life.  However, though its formal features remain the same, its content does not and it is always capable of being transcended as our experience changes and our understanding is deepened, giving us a clearer picture of what we are and what we wish to say.  On Witt's own account, there is a dynamic fluidity of language.   It is for this reason that any critique of language must move from talking about the limits of language to talking about its boundaries, where a boundary is understood not as a wall but a threshold.   vonWrights's comment that Witt's "sentences have a content that often lies deep beneath the surface of language."  On the surface, Witt talks of the insuperable position of ordinary language and the necessity of bringing ourselves to accept it without question.  At the same time, we are faced with Witt's own creative uses of language and his concern for bringing about changes in our traditional modes of understanding.  Philosophy, then, through more perspicacious speech, seeks to effect this unity rather than assuming that it is already functioning. Yes?  The most brilliant of scientists are unable to offer a foundation for human speech so long as they reject Christianity! In his Tractatus we have the well nigh perfect exhibition of the nature of the impasse of the scientific ideal of exhaustive logical analysis of Reality by man.  Perfect language does not exist for fallen man, therefore we must get on about our buisness of relating Truth via ordinary language.    This is why John's Gospel is so dear to most Christians.  It is so simple in it conveyance of the revealation of God, yet so full of unlieing depth of understanding.  He viewed Christ from the OT concept of "as a man thinketh, so he is."  John looked at the outward as only an indicator of what was inside, that is the consciousness of Christ.  And so must we.  Words are only vehicals of truth.  He is truth.  The scriptures are plain in their expounding that there is a Truth and that it is knowable.  THere are absolutes, and they too are knowable.  However, they are only knowable when He reveals them to the individual.  There is, and we shouldn't shy from this, a mysticism to Christianity.  Paul in ROm 8 says there are 3 men in the world.  There is the one who does not have the Spirit and therefore can not know the things of the Spirit (the Spirit of Truth) and there is the one who has the Spirit and has the capacity to know of the Truth, but there  is the third.  THe one who not only has the Spirit, but that the Spirit has him! Who can know the deep things of God and reveal them to us other than the Spirit.  And it is only the deep things of GOd that are absolute and true.    There is such a thing as true truth and it is real, it can be experienced and it is verifiable.  I disagree with Dr Nancy's Sweetie's conclusion because if it is taken to fruition it leads to relativism which leads to dispair.    "I would know the words which He would answer me, and understand what He would say unto me."  Job 23ff  --Rex