thom, i gave further thought to our brief encounter with wittgenstein's tractatus logico-philosophicus, and the questions and inconsistencies that problematized our grooving his ride. picking up his philosophical investigations, however, i was struck by his humble denouncement and sharp criticism of the "grave mistakes" that underlie much of that product..... indeed, it was only through a talking through with another of his associates that he found he hadn't followed through on his philosophical suppositions and implications as forthrightly and thoroughly as he had hoped.
unsurprisingly, he opens the investigations with a discussion of the nature and composition of language. reading his episodic thoughts on the matter, which are salient if unremarkable (he's merely setting the stage), i thought back on the discussion you josh and i had at barra mundi, and the resistance the two of you displayed to my open discussion of language (the context escapes me, largely because teh conversation took a turn for the tangential when you and josh challenged that "knock-knock" WASN'T language,,, or rather, that it was but actually WASN'T).
that tangential turn frustrated me, not least because what we were discussing (and the idea that language is all gestural, immaterial, open and multisplendored) was hardly FAR-OUT; it was in fact GROUND ZERO for where we wanted to go, and yet i had to sit there while josh insisted that language was the mere articulation of sound qua signs. [that's it! "articulation" was the context, but i was using "articulation" to apply to 'language' outside the strict linguistic definition that josh seemed to favor, and you guys challenged.]
it made me think about the nature of our discussion itself and the fact that either of you weren't concerned with engaging in it toward a productive end...... in fact even the question of whose 'end' and toward what conception of 'end' the conversation was directed became a squabbling matter, where i was simply concerned with exchange as a means of getting somewhere and the two of you seemed determined to impede any sense of momentum that might get us out of the spin cycle of that circular conversation.
so this is a blog, and these are my thoughts. my hope is that this Human Movement might provide an appropriate forum where we might sound out whatever ideas concern us, and by posting and responding and actively engaging one another through script, might better articulate the tasks and themes at hand, with a view toward.