Is it possible that if you have something to say, but cannot state it in clear definite terms, in vocabulary which is most popular and accepted as standard, then you actually do not have anything to say at all?
And why can't you definitely and categorically state it? Because doing so would really sabotage the very concept. So you fumble for appropriate words, falter for lack of appropriate vocabulary to convey what's on your mind, remain silent for lack of adequate language, at times invent non-existing words (like Heidegger)...
Does this all mean you have nothing to say? Or what you have is not really worth consideration by the 'experts'?
Some would say that this is not philosophy but something else. But why should it be? Why can't it be still be acknowledged as philosophy? After all there is a whole process of thinking involved, critical reflection carried out, a sincere attempt at verbalizing is done...
And why can't you definitely and categorically state it? Because doing so would really sabotage the very concept. So you fumble for appropriate words, falter for lack of appropriate vocabulary to convey what's on your mind, remain silent for lack of adequate language, at times invent non-existing words (like Heidegger)...
Does this all mean you have nothing to say? Or what you have is not really worth consideration by the 'experts'?
Some would say that this is not philosophy but something else. But why should it be? Why can't it be still be acknowledged as philosophy? After all there is a whole process of thinking involved, critical reflection carried out, a sincere attempt at verbalizing is done...
No comments:
Post a Comment