12:00 "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is a sentence composed by Noam Chomsky in 1957 as an example of a sentence whose grammar is correct but whose meaning is nonsensical. It was used to show inadequacy of the then-popular probabilistic models of grammar, and the need for more structured models
13:35 -- 15:24 lol nailed it, Professor! ...anyway. Yeah, like, if you're a possibilitarian then all ideas (phrases, statements, experiences etc.) are necessarily tautological. Therefore, taking a subjective wordview (any one) is essential.
@@PhiloofAlexandria thank you for your help and for these great videos. From a "continental philosophy" PhD student wanting to learn more about "analytic philosophy"
I'm not sure Carnap did write this. The closest equivalent I've read is in his Elimination of Metaphysics (...) Carnap tackles some Heideggerian sentences a little like this.
I read Ayers book recently and had the feeling that computers would be the better Philosophers if you take up his views. I guess you could empirically verify if certain ideologies create homicidal people or not, if the truth value would "t" okay great, but to ask if it is a good or bad thing is just nonsense? How is his theory of emotivity not the same like total moral relativism...
If "green ideas sleep furiously" is meaningless then why does "there are green ideas that sleep furiously" sound false and not just meaningless? Perhaps it is not about meaninglessness so much as it is about the sentence forcing you to make a presupposition that you know is false.
I like the student interaction in these classes
12:00 "Colorless green ideas sleep furiously" is a sentence composed by Noam Chomsky in 1957 as an example of a sentence whose grammar is correct but whose meaning is nonsensical. It was used to show inadequacy of the then-popular probabilistic models of grammar, and the need for more structured models
13:35 -- 15:24 lol nailed it, Professor! ...anyway. Yeah, like, if you're a possibilitarian then all ideas (phrases, statements, experiences etc.) are necessarily tautological. Therefore, taking a subjective wordview (any one) is essential.
Is there a missing video between the one on Wittgenstein and this one? There seems to be a gap (probably one introducing Ayer?)
Good catch! It's on Logical Empiricism. I've added it in just before this one.
@@PhiloofAlexandria thank you for your help and for these great videos. From a "continental philosophy" PhD student wanting to learn more about "analytic philosophy"
Interesting to see how Noam Chomsky added “colorless” to “green ideas sleep furiously” for quite different purposes concerning universal grammar.
I'm not sure Carnap did write this. The closest equivalent I've read is in his Elimination of Metaphysics (...) Carnap tackles some Heideggerian sentences a little like this.
Greetings from India! I love these lectures. Dear Prof, do you consider Ludwig Von Mises an important figure to study? (Thymology, Praxeology).
I do. I should do some videos discussing his ideas. I have some on Hayek already.
@@PhiloofAlexandria Thanks Prof. I will check out Hayek videos.
"Is the present king of France bald?"
Yes, he had a little taken off the top.
😀
Analytic/Synesthetic distinctions sleep furiously.
I read Ayers book recently and had the feeling that computers would be the better Philosophers if you take up his views.
I guess you could empirically verify if certain ideologies create homicidal people or not, if the truth value would "t" okay great, but to ask if it is a good or bad thing is just nonsense? How is his theory of emotivity not the same like total moral relativism...
LOL. So true. As I was watching this I started to think of verifying the world via running it through code.
The wine guy probably said 'okra', a vegetable, not 'ocher' 😂
Oh! That's make so much more sense!
If "green ideas sleep furiously" is meaningless then why does "there are green ideas that sleep furiously" sound false and not just meaningless? Perhaps it is not about meaninglessness so much as it is about the sentence forcing you to make a presupposition that you know is false.
Frustrated for lack of subtitle.