From: Kirby Urner
Date: Tue Aug 1, 2006 4:57 pm
Subject: Steering Mathematicians to Wittgenstein
As I've written about before in this archive, I think LW's later approach, to choose "language games" over "propositions" for atomic examples, dovetails with the computer science idea of "namespaces".
A namespace isn't just a jumble of words in a bag, or needn't be, might be an intricate ordering or mechanism [organism].
Talking about the remoteness of Fuller's "vocabulary" tended to atomize in terms of "words" (a tendency added to by his use of a "dictionary" metaphor). But as LW shows, it's not words-in- isolation that have meaning, but words in machines (grammars, forms of life).
Now that Fuller's geometry is starting to hit the big screens, generating more public awareness, people are looking for on-ramps or access points. I think Wittgenstein's philo could be it for a lot of people. So I point them to discussion groups like here.
Now let's see if this posts.
Fixed a typo. I'll report back as to whether this innocent-enough post makes it past the censors. Report: it got through as #6277, and the moderator denies any knowledge of a conspiracy to censor me (why my posts died in queue, while others went through, was not explained -- I remain paranoid).