[hist-analytic] Clarity Is Not Enough

Jlsperanza at aol.com Jlsperanza at aol.com
Fri Feb 20 19:39:50 EST 2009

-- says who?
--  says me.
-- whos you
-- Henry  Habberley

-- and you  mean?
-- well it's _not_ is  it.
-- it's not  what?
--  enough.
-- enough  what?
-- Not enough _what_, enough  _for_.

-- for  what?
-- for  life.
-- says  who?
-- says  me
-- who's you

Henry Habberley

"[Granted], clarity  [may] be not enough; but, perhaps, it will be time to go 
this when we are within measurable  distance of achieving
clarity on some  matter."                

In a message dated 2/20/2009 6:52:15 P.M. Eastern Standard  Time, 
rh1 at york.ac.uk writes:

Your description of this book  caused me to get out my copy. What was it you 
wanted to know about the book,  that you hadn't been able to see?

Well,  nothing really!

And contrats on the new issue of The John Locke  Newsletter -- read about it 
in PHILOS-L. My teacher (M. Costa) _loved_ those  newsletters and made _me_ 
love them, too.

But it's an impressive book,  and I'm glad you got out your copy. From the 
cupboard, I assume.

It's the  distinguished Muirhead Library, right? Im-blooming-pressive!

I would  think that the editor was perhaps Welsh. Note the "Lewis" and the 
funny first  names. And then _Prichard_ was Welsh. It's amazing how it takes two 
to  tango!

I was curious if Lewis gets to quote Austin's funny 'dealing' with  the whole 
thing (which irritated R. B. Jones, rightly) in "A plea for excuses".  I hope 
he does! 

Austin's Plea for excuses has no footnotes, but he  _must_ be thinking of 
Prichard. ("Some say clarity is not enough...").  

The list of contents is so overwhelming and I'm flabbergasted to see  Quine! 
I mean, where does he _stand_? He is with Grice and Strawson when he  needs 
them (for that Visiting Scholarship in Oxford) but against the playgroup  when 
he _feels_ like!

The other authors sort of escape me. Let me  revise:

H H Price
yes, the infamous sloganner.  Prof. Wykeham of Logic. Replaced, in all irony, 
by Ayer!

C. D.  Broad
Cambridge man, so what does he know or _can_ know  (i.e. is willing to) re: 
Oxford philosophy?
Yes, S. R.  Bayne loves him... but ... I find his pictures painted with too, 
er, broad  (ouch) a brush. 
Grice amazingly cites him in  "Personal Identity"!

B. Blanshard
This I have  a recollection is a distinguished American philosopher. Surely 
his surname was  officially first "Blanchard". I once met an American whose 
name was "White". I  said, 'That's a clean Anglo-Saxon surname". He said, 
"Actually, it was  originally _Blanche_ but it was changed at Ellis Island". Ah well. 

W.  V.Quine
Yes, the Harvardite.

William  Calvert Kneale
one of the Ryleites. I.e. he  was old enough to be in Ryle's group, along 
with Prichard, and Oscar Wood. That  man (Wood) really should belong to the 
Austin group, but  ...
I forget momentarily what the maiden name of his  wife was. Martha, yes. 
Bayne was saying Anscombe was a character (we should  compile one --alla that 
online dictionary that has 'grice' as 'conceptual  intricacy'). 
I think Grice (in "Reply To Richards")  surprises me when he quotes, I think, 
Kneale on matters of 'induction' and  'probablity'. I must confess I find 
Kneale's writing a bit too Rylean to my  taste, i.e. none of the wit of the 
And just  because his "Growth of Logic" (original title of his lectures -- he 
and Martha  should _never_ have changed it onto 'development' -- sounds 
pretty _cheap_) is  the established vademecum it is, I feel there's an aura of 
authority around the  man that does not really appeal me (And I'm using 'really' 
as the word that  wears the trousers!).

Now he was a  darling. And possibly related to my favourite English soprano, 
I never could digest any of Ewing's readings,  though. He _does_ have a 
lovely surname, though.
I  think he was a _mystic_ and then he was Cantab. so what would _he_  know?

Max Black
Well, the Russian, right (for he  might have been a Roosian, a French, or 
Turk or Prossian). I guess his first  name was Maxwell really. His father had a 
lot of class. He is _an_ interesting  one, but tends to use too general 
phrases. Martinich did I think discuss his  round with Grice in _Dialectica_. I did 
read Black's commentary on Grice in  _Literary History_ I think the magazine is 
called. It has been reprinted. He has  some good points but he is too 
commonsensical to appeal me. He had interesting  things to say about _metaphor_ but I 
find those thoughts too  Wittgenstein-influenced to appeal me!

Peter Heath
Well, he is another darling. First heard of him via browsing Martin Gardner's 
 _Annotated Alice_. He was born in Firenze, of all places, but when I tell my 
 friends that Heath is a 'dago' they laugh! -- I think Gardner discusses his  
views on _Aspects of Alice_, very sensical. For Humpty Dumpty, ordinary words 
do  not have meaning (e.g. 'slithy goves') but proper names do ("Alice", 
"Humpty").  Just because he settled in "the green hills of Somerset" (Weatherley 
tune) he  should be revered. He was a mathematician too but that bit about him 
bores me  slightly. It's amazing how much he contributed to Edwards's 
Encyclopaedia of  Philosophy. 

E.Harris, ...
Now, this sounds like from a  short story by Tennessee Williams. 

(I got the list of contributors from  I think amazon.) and it has the "..." 
at the end, so I hope I _am_ missing a  good old name worth preserving.



**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy 

More information about the hist-analytic mailing list