1
00:00:04,690 --> 00:00:09,980
OK. Today, it's if about recombines.

2
00:00:09,980 --> 00:00:15,380
I suppose that this is going to be photographing the first five minutes.

3
00:00:15,380 --> 00:00:26,540
So I'm going to do a piece on learning in later life. The Saga magazine, you are demonstrating that they all the plan events like.

4
00:00:26,540 --> 00:00:36,560
I do apologise. That's right.

5
00:00:36,560 --> 00:00:40,900
I guess so. Yes, I certainly will. Yes. What I find.

6
00:00:40,900 --> 00:00:49,190
But you know what this is about. Say goodbye. Yes, I think it's something anyway.

7
00:00:49,190 --> 00:00:55,520
And Max is something I wanted to visit.

8
00:00:55,520 --> 00:01:02,660
So we're going to talk about lots of it. I had this last lecture to remember last week.

9
00:01:02,660 --> 00:01:08,330
I asked you to look at the online courses.

10
00:01:08,330 --> 00:01:18,170
I'm going to do is I'm going to run through what the online course looks like, what you would have to do, sort of course, as there are how it works.

11
00:01:18,170 --> 00:01:23,570
So I go online to that point. So you can see exactly what it's like.

12
00:01:23,570 --> 00:01:31,100
You don't have to say, let's don't want to serve three years. You can go OK or stay or if you feel like it.

13
00:01:31,100 --> 00:01:35,260
I'm not sure it could be now that somebody in that region. OK.

14
00:01:35,260 --> 00:01:44,450
So let's look at the language and my philosophy of which is literally the philosophy of language.

15
00:01:44,450 --> 00:01:45,950
I think I've mentioned to you before.

16
00:01:45,950 --> 00:01:56,240
The thing about philosophy is because it's content neutral logic, the methodology we use, it doesn't matter in what area.

17
00:01:56,240 --> 00:02:02,710
You use logic. Language is one of the areas that you could do a philosophy of language.

18
00:02:02,710 --> 00:02:08,560
And that's exactly what I said. I looks at things like what is meaning?

19
00:02:08,560 --> 00:02:13,640
Because the thing about language is the words and sentences. What have you claimed to have?

20
00:02:13,640 --> 00:02:21,800
Meaning. Meaning, exactly. Very, very interesting and deep philosophical question.

21
00:02:21,800 --> 00:02:28,670
How do words refer to objects? So I told you that the top his name was Richard.

22
00:02:28,670 --> 00:02:35,040
OK. I'll just quote Richard, which is just sounds awful. How does it refer to it?

23
00:02:35,040 --> 00:02:43,610
So that is it. So this is a particle. And if I mentioned the jumbuck, OK, I've done it without the person being here.

24
00:02:43,610 --> 00:02:54,500
But you still. Why. Why you don't mind referring to when I say we're told that somebody will live.

25
00:02:54,500 --> 00:03:00,080
Another question related to those words. We actually understand each other.

26
00:03:00,080 --> 00:03:05,570
This is the way I understand you. Different from the way I understand the physical world.

27
00:03:05,570 --> 00:03:14,840
So if I watch two billiard balls interacting and I explain it in terms of cause and effect and I watch two of you conversing,

28
00:03:14,840 --> 00:03:22,260
do I explain that to in terms of. Or is this an explanation with a different kind?

29
00:03:22,260 --> 00:03:27,140
Okay, so those are the questions that we look at, both the medical offices and possibly language.

30
00:03:27,140 --> 00:03:32,570
But those are the three I have today and then we'll go and find.

31
00:03:32,570 --> 00:03:40,130
So let's look first at me. So language, trust me.

32
00:03:40,130 --> 00:03:45,320
All of this is involved in language is the sounds which I am making now.

33
00:03:45,320 --> 00:03:49,730
We shouldn't be using your years. I could be speaking in French.

34
00:03:49,730 --> 00:03:56,910
They could be getting a raise without that big old French. But so let's say jump think that's okay.

35
00:03:56,910 --> 00:04:01,260
And the sounds would be hitting your ears and there would be no understanding there.

36
00:04:01,260 --> 00:04:07,000
With that, my words would have no meaning to you unless you speak.

37
00:04:07,000 --> 00:04:16,550
So I speak Japanese as well. And I'd like to pay for, you know, to write for the flip charts you're reading watching on here.

38
00:04:16,550 --> 00:04:21,770
How did these squiggles on paper have meaning to you?

39
00:04:21,770 --> 00:04:25,760
How come you know the words elephant or you hear the word elephant?

40
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:33,110
And you you're immediately thinking of the Animal House. And it's not just because of the effects either.

41
00:04:33,110 --> 00:04:41,910
It's not just that you've put social it that words with that tangible because you can do it without the animal there.

42
00:04:41,910 --> 00:04:47,810
Okay. There's more to me than just cause and effect.

43
00:04:47,810 --> 00:04:55,700
One explanation for me is that we should think of meaning as the conditions of truth and falsehood.

44
00:04:55,700 --> 00:05:03,110
So think about your trying to explain the meaning of the word cat to a child.

45
00:05:03,110 --> 00:05:06,660
I think I used to see. Before. So I think you're picking it up, right?

46
00:05:06,660 --> 00:05:11,810
Well, what would you do? You'd point out lots of different parts and somebody black,

47
00:05:11,810 --> 00:05:18,690
some of you would begin just some of the big fat cats or something, the cats and some tabby and so on.

48
00:05:18,690 --> 00:05:22,080
Some holds, some kittens.

49
00:05:22,080 --> 00:05:31,620
And what would be good is that the child would abstract away the essential callousness of all the examples you are pointing to.

50
00:05:31,620 --> 00:05:33,300
You not got what you're trying to do.

51
00:05:33,300 --> 00:05:42,810
And then what would you do to test the child's understanding that the child's applauds the meaning of the word pass?

52
00:05:42,810 --> 00:05:47,750
How would you do that to show another picture?

53
00:05:47,750 --> 00:05:51,490
That was what was different, for example. OK.

54
00:05:51,490 --> 00:05:59,020
I'm gonna carry on. I did not want to ask you that. You say there's lots of pushing at what you can.

55
00:05:59,020 --> 00:06:05,130
Oh. You might say what it's like if you start with a stutter pussycat.

56
00:06:05,130 --> 00:06:10,140
If we're talking about teaching the child to give us a few clues, that sort of.

57
00:06:10,140 --> 00:06:15,850
OK. What would you wait for? You said you showed a picture of a horse.

58
00:06:15,850 --> 00:06:22,380
Unbelievable. Good for you. Not a bit of both.

59
00:06:22,380 --> 00:06:26,720
If you learn the lessons of Katherine, we've said. No.

60
00:06:26,720 --> 00:06:31,260
OK. So testing the understanding that the child has got.

61
00:06:31,260 --> 00:06:34,710
You'll show pictures of cats and say it's what you have to devote to it.

62
00:06:34,710 --> 00:06:38,650
Is that the answer? Yes. You'll show pictures of dogs and other animals.

63
00:06:38,650 --> 00:06:43,620
And hope to elicit the answer. No. You'll sometimes say, what is that?

64
00:06:43,620 --> 00:06:47,910
I hope to elicit the answer. Cat, I'm so upset.

65
00:06:47,910 --> 00:06:52,520
What are you actually testing for here? Well, what are you testing, boys?

66
00:06:52,520 --> 00:07:01,170
That count has grasped the conditions under which that is a cat is true.

67
00:07:01,170 --> 00:07:06,000
And that is a cat is false. You see what I mean?

68
00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:09,560
So you showed a picture of a cat and say, is this a pussy cat?

69
00:07:09,560 --> 00:07:13,950
It says, yes, there. But all you show is a picture of a passive say.

70
00:07:13,950 --> 00:07:22,200
What's that? So it says it's the cat. And it's demonstrating because it knows the conditions under which this is a cat.

71
00:07:22,200 --> 00:07:26,910
It's true. I think you show the dog and you say, is this a pussy?

72
00:07:26,910 --> 00:07:31,920
So the child says, no. It's demonstrating that it's understood.

73
00:07:31,920 --> 00:07:36,760
The conditions under which this is a cat is false.

74
00:07:36,760 --> 00:07:38,400
Do you see what I mean?

75
00:07:38,400 --> 00:07:48,990
So lots of people feel that if you ask the question, well, to these meetings, the answer is meaning all the conditions of truth.

76
00:07:48,990 --> 00:07:56,140
So, I mean, it is the conditions of truth and of falsehood almost since it's.

77
00:07:56,140 --> 00:08:01,790
OK. You've got to have me off uns falsehoods in there because I can show the dog in its sights.

78
00:08:01,790 --> 00:08:06,080
This is a catch that it clearly hasn't got it, has it? It's not on the spook yet.

79
00:08:06,080 --> 00:08:12,740
So what it's got to cross in order to understand to grasp the meaning of the sentence.

80
00:08:12,740 --> 00:08:18,020
This is a cat. It's got to know the conditions under which this account is true.

81
00:08:18,020 --> 00:08:23,240
And this is a cat is false. Once it's got no. Do you think it now knows.

82
00:08:23,240 --> 00:08:29,490
Read it, don't you? There isn't anything more. The child has to do to show that sounds good.

83
00:08:29,490 --> 00:08:36,230
Me. So lots of people look sort of demeaning as conditions of truth and falsity.

84
00:08:36,230 --> 00:08:37,210
That's what we're grabbing.

85
00:08:37,210 --> 00:08:48,890
And notice that meaning Colin's come apart from understanding to know the meaning of the sentence is to understand that sentence, isn't it?

86
00:08:48,890 --> 00:08:57,210
Okay, so meaning that if you construct a theory of meaning, what you are doing is constructing a theory of what it is.

87
00:08:57,210 --> 00:09:02,190
The people who speaks perfect language to understand something.

88
00:09:02,190 --> 00:09:11,600
A case of meaning and understanding. Get it together. OK, so we're asking, how does language have meaning?

89
00:09:11,600 --> 00:09:19,790
We've got some hypotheses here. Maybe. Meaning constitutes the conditions of truth and falsehood.

90
00:09:19,790 --> 00:09:35,400
But we've got another question here. Well, is that right? Because if I write a sentence like this, Richard is a photographer.

91
00:09:35,400 --> 00:09:39,690
I'm trying to make people forget you, Richard. OK.

92
00:09:39,690 --> 00:09:47,910
Right, Richard? Actually, no, I'm sorry. That's actually a very bad example because he's here and you know what I'm talking about.

93
00:09:47,910 --> 00:09:53,940
Well, I want to write this. John, is this tall?

94
00:09:53,940 --> 00:10:00,500
OK. You want to sign that sentence? Thank you. You understand what the meaning of that sentence is?

95
00:10:00,500 --> 00:10:05,210
Do you think somebody said no? No.

96
00:10:05,210 --> 00:10:08,520
They won't give it to you. OK. You want some what that means.

97
00:10:08,520 --> 00:10:14,420
But now tell me it's truth body. Is it true or false?

98
00:10:14,420 --> 00:10:18,290
It could be either. Since you don't know the truth. Audio of that.

99
00:10:18,290 --> 00:10:26,800
But. But how can you know the meaning of something without being able to determine whether it's true or false?

100
00:10:26,800 --> 00:10:38,030
I mean, how she knows the meaning of something without being able to determine whether it's true or false.

101
00:10:38,030 --> 00:10:41,710
There is also this question that no one wanted to admit it. Let's see if we can get it.

102
00:10:41,710 --> 00:10:47,300
Thoughts, you know what somebody is pushing for. Thank you for your concern.

103
00:10:47,300 --> 00:10:52,980
Because if we could fall back to spirit, why not?

104
00:10:52,980 --> 00:10:57,590
Why can't you? I mean, that was very good. But why do you have the communications?

105
00:10:57,590 --> 00:11:03,810
Of which information do you need? Don't need to know what this was.

106
00:11:03,810 --> 00:11:12,560
He refers to what else you need to know. What is told means as well.

107
00:11:12,560 --> 00:11:24,050
Okay, um, what I've done here is I've written on the board a type of sentence and we're now talking about sentences of this type.

108
00:11:24,050 --> 00:11:29,100
What I'm not doing here is using this sentence.

109
00:11:29,100 --> 00:11:34,450
You see what I mean? That's why it's got tough folks around, because it's just a tiny percentage this, isn't it?

110
00:11:34,450 --> 00:11:39,830
It's a sentence that could be used to tell you something.

111
00:11:39,830 --> 00:11:44,560
So this sentence, the reason I suddenly realised it was a bad example.

112
00:11:44,560 --> 00:11:48,980
And did you see why it was a bad example? You've understood what I'm saying.

113
00:11:48,980 --> 00:11:55,730
OK. This was a bad example because I said Ritchies is OK for having just introduced you to Richard, the photographer.

114
00:11:55,730 --> 00:12:01,700
So, of course, you can determine the truth value of that. So I was mentioning that.

115
00:12:01,700 --> 00:12:05,480
But I could just use this and therefore I confused you.

116
00:12:05,480 --> 00:12:17,000
Whereas this one might only benefit. I'm not using a tool and it's only a sentence in use that has a true value.

117
00:12:17,000 --> 00:12:33,910
Does that make sense? I that have facts and they have parents.

118
00:12:33,910 --> 00:12:42,630
Well, in fact that's what I'd say. This is a type of sensories which which has very much has meaning,

119
00:12:42,630 --> 00:12:48,730
but it's just tough for me to say it's because you can't determine the truth, value what you understand.

120
00:12:48,730 --> 00:13:01,810
This is a census type. That could be used to say something.

121
00:13:01,810 --> 00:13:07,490
A pay could be used to say something, but it isn't being used to say something.

122
00:13:07,490 --> 00:13:15,500
I'm just talking about it. So I think that's what you meant. But but to use the technical terminology, this is a sentence type.

123
00:13:15,500 --> 00:13:21,080
Not an abstract sentence sentence time, which could be used to say something.

124
00:13:21,080 --> 00:13:26,800
I did my job. No.

125
00:13:26,800 --> 00:13:34,550
It must be the only thing I her.

126
00:13:34,550 --> 00:13:39,490
I'm going to call you John, sir. Yes. OK.

127
00:13:39,490 --> 00:13:47,450
Would you like stand up? This is John. And now I'm going to use a sentence, I would say John Paul.

128
00:13:47,450 --> 00:13:52,070
Okay. Now I'm using this sentence. How do you determine the truth finally?

129
00:13:52,070 --> 00:13:57,200
Now you want to sell it to us.

130
00:13:57,200 --> 00:14:01,910
But most people, I think, would say yes. What was high tell you, John?

131
00:14:01,910 --> 00:14:05,490
Fine. Fine. I know. Well, anyway,

132
00:14:05,490 --> 00:14:11,800
I think you see the difference between the meaning of a sentence that's not

133
00:14:11,800 --> 00:14:16,540
being used and the meaning of a sentence that is being used in the first place.

134
00:14:16,540 --> 00:14:22,270
You grasp the meaning. But it's not enough to determine the truth in the second case.

135
00:14:22,270 --> 00:14:28,190
Did you grasp the meaning? You know, enough to determine the truth.

136
00:14:28,190 --> 00:14:34,750
You. So in the first place, you know only the conditions of truth and falsehood.

137
00:14:34,750 --> 00:14:43,480
Okay, so you know, a meaning that consists in nothing more than the conditions in which this sentence would be true.

138
00:14:43,480 --> 00:14:44,890
You would see.

139
00:14:44,890 --> 00:14:54,550
Whereas the minute I tell you to whom it refers, assuming you all understand what his total means, you could then determine the truth from you.

140
00:14:54,550 --> 00:15:04,100
So if you know the truth conditions plus the context, you can determine the truth value.

141
00:15:04,100 --> 00:15:11,410
Okay. So some people have said that meaning in essence, the conditions of truth and falsity.

142
00:15:11,410 --> 00:15:18,160
It's actually the use of the conditions of truth and false.

143
00:15:18,160 --> 00:15:26,080
So this if I write I told the board without using is a tool that doesn't have any meaning.

144
00:15:26,080 --> 00:15:30,240
What you will prosper is grasping for.

145
00:15:30,240 --> 00:15:35,750
It's very difficult to not say what it means. This is not the meaning.

146
00:15:35,750 --> 00:15:40,890
Okay. You're you're grasping what it could be used to be, but not its meaning.

147
00:15:40,890 --> 00:15:45,940
It's only what I actually make it concrete. I'm putting up your book.

148
00:15:45,940 --> 00:15:52,600
It's only when I tell you what John refers to, whom John prefers doesn't have proper meaning.

149
00:15:52,600 --> 00:15:57,240
So people talk about weak and strong meaning.

150
00:15:57,240 --> 00:16:03,350
And some people say that weak means less meaning, the meaning way unlawful use.

151
00:16:03,350 --> 00:16:10,120
If you just mentioned that it is that we need to talk and other people say this is meaning,

152
00:16:10,120 --> 00:16:15,670
but there's meaning and there's use and there are two different things. You had a question.

153
00:16:15,670 --> 00:16:19,490
First of all, it's not so I that we should answer it.

154
00:16:19,490 --> 00:16:28,480
And you said comes up using that then this particular meaning of the word, you are using it to refer.

155
00:16:28,480 --> 00:16:36,490
No. Oh, I'm using it as an example. I'm not using the sentence to I seem to express that.

156
00:16:36,490 --> 00:16:40,900
Which is why it's wrong. Because it's it's very important.

157
00:16:40,900 --> 00:16:58,870
If I. I can. If like Roy Flat, that of which of those I say testify.

158
00:16:58,870 --> 00:17:05,060
That who's. What does it say?

159
00:17:05,060 --> 00:17:12,760
I can't say what it says. What does this Chad and the is hair with quotes around it.

160
00:17:12,760 --> 00:17:27,720
OK. OK. Which of these could I say? Gates has five letters on the bottom one and only the bottom one, because here I'm using it to mean Chad.

161
00:17:27,720 --> 00:17:32,540
And here because they're close friends. I'm talking about the word on time.

162
00:17:32,540 --> 00:17:37,240
If I say Chad equates rounds, I'm not talking about chess a tool.

163
00:17:37,240 --> 00:17:46,880
I mean, it's very difficult to do this already. But if I say Chad has five letters, that's a grammatical sentence, isn't it?

164
00:17:46,880 --> 00:17:52,610
Whereas FISA chair has five letters. Is that's a grammatical sentence?

165
00:17:52,610 --> 00:18:00,920
No, it isn't. And that's because I'm not making it clear by mentioning the word Chad, not using the word Chad.

166
00:18:00,920 --> 00:18:07,570
So there's a huge difference to use Mench against anyone these days, understands that quote.

167
00:18:07,570 --> 00:18:16,380
So used very sparingly and often wrongly and actually changes the meaning usually.

168
00:18:16,380 --> 00:18:21,570
So let me ask you this, when I first, whose job is Ocean?

169
00:18:21,570 --> 00:18:28,340
Well, just put that sentence that I wasn't using, as I was mentioning, and then I was talking about it.

170
00:18:28,340 --> 00:18:34,430
And then when I use it to say all this talk, you could then determine the truth.

171
00:18:34,430 --> 00:18:41,450
But at what point you that to meaning if you can't tell the truth by yet.

172
00:18:41,450 --> 00:18:48,720
So if I ask for a sentence of. Well, I think it's a meaningful sentence.

173
00:18:48,720 --> 00:18:53,940
But are you able to determine which you can't. But unless you speak Russian.

174
00:18:53,940 --> 00:19:06,040
So the meaning is completely useless to you. Sounds if you don't grasp with meaning generosity and two sentences meaning you don't tell them sunder.

175
00:19:06,040 --> 00:19:14,390
Speaking English I know you don't feel you used it.

176
00:19:14,390 --> 00:19:21,780
Well, what do you think I did? Well, two other people think, oh, OK.

177
00:19:21,780 --> 00:19:27,860
I'm just saying, if I'm talking about this tool in order to teach the verb to be.

178
00:19:27,860 --> 00:19:36,840
Am I using the old mentioning in the sentence. John is tall.

179
00:19:36,840 --> 00:19:42,880
I actually I can do both, but I'm saying John is tall.

180
00:19:42,880 --> 00:19:48,750
John and Susan. Not all. John, Susan and No.

181
00:19:48,750 --> 00:19:57,860
I am too. I can't decline it. What am I doing?

182
00:19:57,860 --> 00:20:01,700
Would you rather. But I'm not using the sentence. John is toward healing.

183
00:20:01,700 --> 00:20:10,660
Yes. I'm mentioning it sounds I mean, I'm using the mention office to teach grammar superheavy.

184
00:20:10,660 --> 00:20:16,300
I'm using the mention of the census to teach. I'm not using the sentence from this tool.

185
00:20:16,300 --> 00:20:20,470
I do not intend to convey to you the information that John is taught.

186
00:20:20,470 --> 00:20:26,590
I intend to convey to you the information that is is the correct.

187
00:20:26,590 --> 00:20:30,370
Got it right. OK.

188
00:20:30,370 --> 00:20:34,810
So we've got two hypotheses here about what the meaning is.

189
00:20:34,810 --> 00:20:39,490
One is the meaning is the conditions of the publicity of a sentence.

190
00:20:39,490 --> 00:20:48,640
So when you grasp the meaning, you grasp the conditions under which the sentence would be true or false if it were you.

191
00:20:48,640 --> 00:20:52,820
Okay, let's say that John is tall, as you brought me back,

192
00:20:52,820 --> 00:20:59,980
lost the conditions under which a sentence like that, if it were used, would be true or false.

193
00:20:59,980 --> 00:21:08,470
Or you say, well, actually, it's a necessary condition of grasping, meaning that you can determine the truth.

194
00:21:08,470 --> 00:21:17,020
So you don't actually grasp the meaning of this at all. You only cross the meaning when I say John is all right.

195
00:21:17,020 --> 00:21:25,930
So one theory is should be very clear.

196
00:21:25,930 --> 00:21:34,520
Memories of meeting. What is truth?

197
00:21:34,520 --> 00:21:40,690
Theory? The second is use clearly.

198
00:21:40,690 --> 00:21:46,790
And you may be interested to hear that both of those are attributable to other people as well.

199
00:21:46,790 --> 00:21:52,260
But pre-eminent leaving injured time, the earlier victims sign for truth.

200
00:21:52,260 --> 00:21:56,720
Conditions vary, but later they can find full forward use theory.

201
00:21:56,720 --> 00:22:02,200
And he thought that if you persist, you accept to use that to deny truth.

202
00:22:02,200 --> 00:22:05,560
Condition theory and vice versa.

203
00:22:05,560 --> 00:22:18,900
But in fact, many people, and I'm one of them, think that actually you need both in order to have a full theory with meaning.

204
00:22:18,900 --> 00:22:28,860
And if you draw a representation of meaning, it's going to look something like this, and I may already have done this for you at some point.

205
00:22:28,860 --> 00:22:34,720
Do you remember? This is a representation meeting.

206
00:22:34,720 --> 00:22:41,600
Plus, we've got the strict literal truth is.

207
00:22:41,600 --> 00:22:51,360
Two slightly positive conditions, I say two conditions short, but she always handles the conditions as well.

208
00:22:51,360 --> 00:23:02,630
The group tax free movement forward, that is that was the beginning of the Panopto.

209
00:23:02,630 --> 00:23:06,710
What are we gonna do? Can you still see the street actually?

210
00:23:06,710 --> 00:23:14,480
How about that? That's a. So I've got several things surface here in the centre.

211
00:23:14,480 --> 00:23:20,570
I've written strict and literal truth conditions. So the door is shut.

212
00:23:20,570 --> 00:23:26,280
Now, you've all understood that, haven't you? You know, once you understood that the use of the meaning of the sentence,

213
00:23:26,280 --> 00:23:36,820
I started thinking the truth conditions or the use of the sentence, the door shut for truth conditions.

214
00:23:36,820 --> 00:23:41,170
You've understood how that sentence could be used. If I use that.

215
00:23:41,170 --> 00:23:44,840
OK. So I'll now use the door. It's not the case.

216
00:23:44,840 --> 00:23:49,580
The door is closed. OK. So I've use that sentence in Beijing.

217
00:23:49,580 --> 00:23:54,530
Another sentence if I wanted to answer something true. But maybe not something false.

218
00:23:54,530 --> 00:23:59,330
The door. A shot was like using or imagining that sentence.

219
00:23:59,330 --> 00:24:20,830
I was using it then, wasn't I? I determined that it's false. So I felt I should simply.

220
00:24:20,830 --> 00:24:31,630
OK, now I can operate on that sentence in various ways, I can say shut the door or I can say, is the door shut?

221
00:24:31,630 --> 00:24:37,330
Or I can say for the sake of the door shut.

222
00:24:37,330 --> 00:24:46,480
In each case, I'm using a different tone on type esoteric term in the final case, interrogative tone, imperative tone, etc.

223
00:24:46,480 --> 00:24:52,260
So I operate in court, not sentenced to change what I'm doing with it.

224
00:24:52,260 --> 00:25:02,230
You see what I mean? I'm using it in different ways here. The one sentence or one set of strict literal truth conditions plus a number of operations.

225
00:25:02,230 --> 00:25:07,610
Oh, not change what I'm doing with it then I've got.

226
00:25:07,610 --> 00:25:18,090
Sorry that was true. Or. That's because with which I'm using the senses not to tone is something different.

227
00:25:18,090 --> 00:25:22,180
But here is the door shut.

228
00:25:22,180 --> 00:25:27,080
Get a glass to make good on that.

229
00:25:27,080 --> 00:25:33,470
Do you see what I mean. I'm being sarcastic all the time. Something like that too.

230
00:25:33,470 --> 00:25:39,260
So Tony can sometimes change things. I'm not angry.

231
00:25:39,260 --> 00:25:48,120
OK, what did I just say? You meaning you will adopt from that is that I'm hungry, won't you?

232
00:25:48,120 --> 00:25:54,560
It's also a tool. But, you know, I'm using the strict literal truth conditions,

233
00:25:54,560 --> 00:26:04,250
an esoteric force and a tone of that makes it absolutely clear that you understand the complete opposite of what was fixed.

234
00:26:04,250 --> 00:26:07,200
Literal truth. Conditions are OK.

235
00:26:07,200 --> 00:26:15,540
So I can use those strictures to treat conditions in many different ways, depending on how varied the false undertone.

236
00:26:15,540 --> 00:26:20,750
And here's no one asked me whether so-and-so is a good philosopher.

237
00:26:20,750 --> 00:26:28,710
Ask me whether. Sorry. Until then. Peter asked me whether this is a good philosopher, Peter, a good listener.

238
00:26:28,710 --> 00:26:39,900
His handwriting is excellent. I want to say what you said earlier about Felstead.

239
00:26:39,900 --> 00:26:44,050
What if I just said exactly.

240
00:26:44,050 --> 00:26:54,240
People understood immediately had to give up. You understood because I used the script to mithril truth conditions in the normal way.

241
00:26:54,240 --> 00:26:59,410
No. The fact is, the context changed everything.

242
00:26:59,410 --> 00:27:05,280
You didn't you thought you understood what I said.

243
00:27:05,280 --> 00:27:14,970
If you hadn't understood districts and literal truth. So what you needed was the whole thing, didn't you?

244
00:27:14,970 --> 00:27:25,460
You needed to know that I was answering a question of whether certain meeting with an audience would be a the answer to a different question,

245
00:27:25,460 --> 00:27:32,990
but when is an insultingly irrelevant of to this particular question.

246
00:27:32,990 --> 00:27:41,760
And therefore, it do something different. The relevance, in other words, to something some change of mediated by.

247
00:27:41,760 --> 00:27:48,710
So if this is a representation of meaning, some people say this is me.

248
00:27:48,710 --> 00:27:59,280
All right. So that's the truth. Condition theory of eating and other people thinks that you've got to have all of this before you have meaning.

249
00:27:59,280 --> 00:28:03,320
So that's the early sign of truth commission theory.

250
00:28:03,320 --> 00:28:10,050
And that's the late British. That used islands.

251
00:28:10,050 --> 00:28:15,270
Then there are people like me who think you've got to have those thoughts, actually.

252
00:28:15,270 --> 00:28:21,720
You've got to understand a set of strict a literal truth conditions before you then operate on

253
00:28:21,720 --> 00:28:27,150
those strict literal truth conditions in all the different ways to generate strong reading.

254
00:28:27,150 --> 00:28:31,400
So I call that and so many other philosophers. This is not just me.

255
00:28:31,400 --> 00:28:38,430
We have meaning. And this is a strong feeling.

256
00:28:38,430 --> 00:28:43,710
So meaning is ambiguous. The word meaning is unambiguous.

257
00:28:43,710 --> 00:28:50,040
Lots of different meanings of the word, meaning certain. But what I've done is gone through.

258
00:28:50,040 --> 00:28:53,040
We've got this and how I have landed at this time.

259
00:28:53,040 --> 00:29:05,840
Happy to allow with squiggles to sound soft, meaning one response is really of the truth and falsity problem with that history.

260
00:29:05,840 --> 00:29:14,160
It doesn't distinguish that use meaning. So other people think that meaning is use.

261
00:29:14,160 --> 00:29:23,320
And how do things like context contribute? Well, what they suggest they might suggest that one or other of those theories is true,

262
00:29:23,320 --> 00:29:28,720
or they could suggest that actually both are needed before you get full.

263
00:29:28,720 --> 00:29:32,520
As you said. Understood. His handwriting is excellent.

264
00:29:32,520 --> 00:29:41,730
If you haven't understood both districts and this will treat conditions and the context with you had to get both of those to understand.

265
00:29:41,730 --> 00:29:48,360
And there are all sorts of other examples like that. Search being.

266
00:29:48,360 --> 00:29:51,870
What's your name? Yeah.

267
00:29:51,870 --> 00:30:03,900
If you're being late every single time to this lecture in ten minutes, few funds isn't the same as the door to door when I say early again.

268
00:30:03,900 --> 00:30:15,690
What have I said? So you know, the tone of sarcasm, together with the context that you do, turns the meeting around again.

269
00:30:15,690 --> 00:30:29,750
And you know that because you are English speakers who answer some really old cultural have never.

270
00:30:29,750 --> 00:30:35,960
It's certainly the case that you do have to believe that there isn't any meaning in English because of being a marathon speaker.

271
00:30:35,960 --> 00:30:40,740
There are different context, different, totally different forces.

272
00:30:40,740 --> 00:30:48,830
But it also means so different languages. They use different conventions to do the same thing.

273
00:30:48,830 --> 00:30:52,220
So this is where all the plot doesn't tell me.

274
00:30:52,220 --> 00:30:56,120
Can anyone give me an example of where would you like to go?

275
00:30:56,120 --> 00:31:01,830
Well, I'm sure there are issues.

276
00:31:01,830 --> 00:31:06,770
This is art. I make sure I get a good one.

277
00:31:06,770 --> 00:31:12,920
There are all sorts of others such that if you know I'm sorry, I come from a single example,

278
00:31:12,920 --> 00:31:17,180
but you have 10 tenses could be done different in different ways.

279
00:31:17,180 --> 00:31:23,510
It's called the questions can be done differently in different languages. So each language is different.

280
00:31:23,510 --> 00:31:27,070
Of course, the problem, the counter individuated language,

281
00:31:27,070 --> 00:31:33,480
I might say Irish and English in the same language, or you might say that difference for that very reason.

282
00:31:33,480 --> 00:31:46,040
The here. So the American Navy ship right now is down.

283
00:31:46,040 --> 00:31:57,260
But let's hope we have some rough minorities. It's a case where I can say, I'm sure, American and French,

284
00:31:57,260 --> 00:32:26,610
that you have the philosopher's tool making when you go I by doing so well, maybe those three.

285
00:32:26,610 --> 00:32:34,150
Well, what do you do? Have language. You're not really interested in that you you're interested in the noble advance meaning.

286
00:32:34,150 --> 00:32:38,290
And so it would it not interest that. Oh yeah.

287
00:32:38,290 --> 00:32:52,360
You know for me because. Fact, if the person doesn't phone stand and say, wait, do you want to send me back?

288
00:32:52,360 --> 00:33:00,820
Of course, but they wouldn't particularly be interested in examining of a malfunctioning speak of language.

289
00:33:00,820 --> 00:33:07,830
And in this case, there is a malfunction. Do you have a video if you want to understand the phenomenon itself?

290
00:33:07,830 --> 00:33:15,770
You will you will look at normal function of that phenomenon and then you might go from that to look it up.

291
00:33:15,770 --> 00:33:19,270
Normal functioning. That's indeed by right.

292
00:33:19,270 --> 00:33:24,070
It's a fact. We'll talk a bit about something like that before.

293
00:33:24,070 --> 00:33:33,210
But I had the chance to get one of us. I mean, there's something about.

294
00:33:33,210 --> 00:33:41,830
I mean. It to be something that every person would come through.

295
00:33:41,830 --> 00:33:46,570
It's valuable, but isn't it isn't truth valuable?

296
00:33:46,570 --> 00:33:55,660
I mean, when I was excited about ethics, I said to you, what would happen if I suppose that most people are telling the truth.

297
00:33:55,660 --> 00:33:59,510
Most of the time. What would happen?

298
00:33:59,510 --> 00:34:11,020
If you couldn't rely on the fact that most people tell the truth most of the time, great communication would break down completely, wouldn't it?

299
00:34:11,020 --> 00:34:15,150
Because what would be the point that I ask you, what's a little set of all you tell me?

300
00:34:15,150 --> 00:34:23,160
That I think, well, can I believe her? So truth is hugely valuable.

301
00:34:23,160 --> 00:34:27,430
Honest exchange of information. And of course, we're not just talking about inflation, but the cinema.

302
00:34:27,430 --> 00:34:34,480
If I say I love you. Fine. Of course, in that sense, it's rough for you.

303
00:34:34,480 --> 00:34:42,440
I want to talk about that. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I say, I love you, I'm getting information.

304
00:34:42,440 --> 00:34:52,750
I'll type it, but it's information of a different kind from. But it's still the case that you hope that the conditions that make that sentence true.

305
00:34:52,750 --> 00:35:03,190
Point actually, a team, if I said that, sends this to you in a situation, the right situation, and you'd be very upset if they didn't.

306
00:35:03,190 --> 00:35:08,160
So there is a lot of value in feeling, but the value is usually attached to truth.

307
00:35:08,160 --> 00:35:13,880
And if you shoot the truth about all sorts of things that we value right now,

308
00:35:13,880 --> 00:35:20,740
for example, we'll just a different people seem to find meaning differently.

309
00:35:20,740 --> 00:35:24,580
Oh, you're about being in a rather metaphorical sense here.

310
00:35:24,580 --> 00:35:29,560
I mean, there's another sense, meaning the meaning of a picture or a painting or something like that.

311
00:35:29,560 --> 00:35:35,690
The meaning of it. And what's the meaning of wearing that dress?

312
00:35:35,690 --> 00:35:40,870
Do you see what I mean? Is that that's a secondary meaning of meaning, isn't it?

313
00:35:40,870 --> 00:35:43,630
And I'm talking about philosophy of language.

314
00:35:43,630 --> 00:35:52,800
So I'm talking about the meaning of sentences, words and sort of the meaning of paintings or dresses or whatever.

315
00:35:52,800 --> 00:35:58,300
Oh, my God. You've got to do 20 years going to the meaning of life.

316
00:35:58,300 --> 00:36:07,580
I the with your analysis now. Oh well do another few lectures.

317
00:36:07,580 --> 00:36:12,190
I think we need to not only just starting with the beauty of the meaning of life.

318
00:36:12,190 --> 00:36:21,790
I'd be lecturing for 22 years now. I'm just asking. I mean, it's actually.

319
00:36:21,790 --> 00:36:29,240
She was was. But what's the meaning of wearing that dress?

320
00:36:29,240 --> 00:36:33,890
I mean, that's an emotional thing. She knows I have a lot to do. I was going to wear that dress today.

321
00:36:33,890 --> 00:36:38,460
Why is she wearing that one, which is Crankcase with it? That's an emotional thing.

322
00:36:38,460 --> 00:36:44,930
You know, I love you. Doesn't that have an emotional me? I hate you.

323
00:36:44,930 --> 00:36:48,440
I love your skills as an emotional lady.

324
00:36:48,440 --> 00:36:57,350
But the meaning is in order to get the emotion behind my entrance or something, you got to understand the strict literal truth conditions of it.

325
00:36:57,350 --> 00:37:02,390
If you didn't understand the conditions under which I love you, it's true,

326
00:37:02,390 --> 00:37:10,840
then you wouldn't get any emotional response when I say I love you because you know what that means.

327
00:37:10,840 --> 00:37:15,130
You see what I mean? The emotion is second to reading.

328
00:37:15,130 --> 00:37:22,890
It's to do with understanding it, but it's understanding. The meaning is what causes whatever emotion you work for.

329
00:37:22,890 --> 00:37:26,770
Thank you. Thank you.

330
00:37:26,770 --> 00:37:31,060
Well, that's a secondary metaphorical meaning of meaning.

331
00:37:31,060 --> 00:37:40,990
So that painting has a set meaning to me is not talking about language is a system that's painting and I'm talking about philosophy and language.

332
00:37:40,990 --> 00:37:48,490
That man is not a sentence. He's a man. So that's not the meaning sort of meaning.

333
00:37:48,490 --> 00:37:56,840
I said to you that the meaning is multiple because I get one more Westerlund that I think just just matter.

334
00:37:56,840 --> 00:38:02,770
Is that his own words?

335
00:38:02,770 --> 00:38:08,530
Well, we can call it something like that. I think most people use meaning to use meaning in that context.

336
00:38:08,530 --> 00:38:12,840
So you would be changing language if we did that.

337
00:38:12,840 --> 00:38:16,610
And that's not usually a good thing to do. It's a much better thing to do.

338
00:38:16,610 --> 00:38:23,500
Focus on why the word meaning is used in that way as well as the other way.

339
00:38:23,500 --> 00:38:33,490
OK. So that's that's meaning when it comes time to see how the words effect objects.

340
00:38:33,490 --> 00:38:44,530
So I talk about meaning a meaning is actually a function of sentences instead of meaning, not words.

341
00:38:44,530 --> 00:38:53,900
This let me convince you of this. If I say chair, what if I said thank you.

342
00:38:53,900 --> 00:38:58,030
Yes, I had such was once a word.

343
00:38:58,030 --> 00:39:02,050
A word. I said anything with meaning. I haven't time.

344
00:39:02,050 --> 00:39:06,840
I, I've, I've given you anything with conditions. Apparels.

345
00:39:06,840 --> 00:39:13,110
No. I can do anything I have. I use the word share in any meaningful way.

346
00:39:13,110 --> 00:39:19,080
OK, what I've got to give you to get meaning is is structured.

347
00:39:19,080 --> 00:39:23,110
OK. One word will not do it. There a lot you might think though.

348
00:39:23,110 --> 00:39:29,800
One word sentences. I say go. I'll give you something with truth conditions sometime.

349
00:39:29,800 --> 00:39:34,660
What you do is not is not fulfilled with conditions. Come on.

350
00:39:34,660 --> 00:39:42,860
Do you see what I mean. But where is the structure?

351
00:39:42,860 --> 00:39:52,640
And yes, the English language is not there's a structure somewhere is they're actually the subject, but in some way.

352
00:39:52,640 --> 00:39:59,580
But you go back, they said the demonstration is part of the structure.

353
00:39:59,580 --> 00:40:06,140
The implicit to you, which comes from the classes, is an imperative that you go there.

354
00:40:06,140 --> 00:40:10,320
A. You've got something that has truth conditions.

355
00:40:10,320 --> 00:40:21,270
Now, what is good? If I don't talk to you and I do it demonstrate has no meaning, does it.

356
00:40:21,270 --> 00:40:32,490
So in order to get. Meaning you've got a sense, something of structure, of words does not have meaning except in its contribution to a sentence.

357
00:40:32,490 --> 00:40:45,150
So when you're looking at a sentence like this. John is tall.

358
00:40:45,150 --> 00:40:47,690
OK? It's composed meaning of words.

359
00:40:47,690 --> 00:40:54,540
And of course, this is important because Mary loves John has a different meaning from John, loves Mary, doesn't it?

360
00:40:54,540 --> 00:41:01,890
So it's not just the meaning of words with actions or the contribution made by the words to the sentences.

361
00:41:01,890 --> 00:41:10,230
It's also the way those words combines, says the grammar, the syntax, as well as the semantics of the word.

362
00:41:10,230 --> 00:41:17,550
So to understand that, you've got to understand who Joan Rivers and of course, you might to kill a name.

363
00:41:17,550 --> 00:41:26,550
So you've got to know to what Joan Rivers. And you've got to know what is tool is OK.

364
00:41:26,550 --> 00:41:30,770
Well, how do we do this? Well, let me tell you that, Calvin, introduce a new word for you.

365
00:41:30,770 --> 00:41:36,860
Get bouquet. Would you stand up for turn and face everyone.

366
00:41:36,860 --> 00:41:44,660
You the same. And John, do you do the same, please?

367
00:41:44,660 --> 00:41:50,320
I'm Roger. I think that's it.

368
00:41:50,320 --> 00:41:55,260
OK. Not all these people are gross. Oh, gross.

369
00:41:55,260 --> 00:42:07,200
I'm not British. Neither is honest. OK, I know it's not broche either, but Pacer isn't gross.

370
00:42:07,200 --> 00:42:12,750
OK. Have we understood what is Groshen means? Yes. Is clarity glasses.

371
00:42:12,750 --> 00:42:23,490
OK. Another. How do you spell duration?

372
00:42:23,490 --> 00:42:26,120
Yes, I think about that issue.

373
00:42:26,120 --> 00:42:38,450
The way I got you to understand that was by identifying your thoughts of people as Roesch, identifying a few others to see what I was doing.

374
00:42:38,450 --> 00:42:43,710
I was giving you the truth and conditions of this group. Well, it's true that something is broken.

375
00:42:43,710 --> 00:42:45,600
There's also something special.

376
00:42:45,600 --> 00:42:55,430
And so what you're doing when you're understanding words as opposed to sentences is understanding the contribution that they make to the truth.

377
00:42:55,430 --> 00:42:58,910
Conditions of the sentence. Okay.

378
00:42:58,910 --> 00:43:07,150
So in understanding a sentence, you're grasping the truth conditions and the skills and the use and an understanding of words.

379
00:43:07,150 --> 00:43:15,380
The to be the condition that cited the contribution made by those words to a sentence in which the words used.

380
00:43:15,380 --> 00:43:20,150
And once you've understood his approach, you can understand it in different contexts, can't you?

381
00:43:20,150 --> 00:43:29,080
Would you set up these turn and face people? Are you as this person, Groeschel not?

382
00:43:29,080 --> 00:43:39,630
Yes, they are. OK, so you understand things like this question do separate is where I put this.

383
00:43:39,630 --> 00:43:44,100
Someone says that his son is gone.

384
00:43:44,100 --> 00:43:49,470
And as you heard, was difficult. Have you understood this means?

385
00:43:49,470 --> 00:43:56,880
Did you? And this is because words of the two actions that you've put together in various

386
00:43:56,880 --> 00:44:02,520
combinations and it just gives you in a potentially infinite understanding,

387
00:44:02,520 --> 00:44:06,360
doesn't it? You don't have to have heard a sentence before.

388
00:44:06,360 --> 00:44:12,030
To understand what it means. You understand the atoms and their combinations.

389
00:44:12,030 --> 00:44:18,680
So you understand the meaning of the words and the meaning of the rules of combinations.

390
00:44:18,680 --> 00:44:24,330
And that gives you a potentially infinite understanding. OK.

391
00:44:24,330 --> 00:44:40,360
So how do we get to know the words refer? Well, some people have said since its definition, but pointed to the dot and say dot is broche thumbs up.

392
00:44:40,360 --> 00:44:46,240
OK, great. Would you have understood what I meant?

393
00:44:46,240 --> 00:44:53,230
I say, look, she's British. Well, I'm not.

394
00:44:53,230 --> 00:44:59,270
You'll use the word, but what why? Look, I'm ostensibly to the evil.

395
00:44:59,270 --> 00:45:11,640
Yeah, it looks to us I'm pointing my point to a gracious even if I get my.

396
00:45:11,640 --> 00:45:16,760
I don't the thing is, I don't point to any one aspect of anything.

397
00:45:16,760 --> 00:45:24,940
I like what you have to say, that it could easily mean that the colour of the cattle, the sheep, the council whispers on the cattle.

398
00:45:24,940 --> 00:45:30,710
I mean, you're quite old movies instead of weekend school next weekend.

399
00:45:30,710 --> 00:45:37,130
Coyne says if you're in a foreign country, something points to the rabbit, says you got a guy.

400
00:45:37,130 --> 00:45:46,080
OK. Do you seem to have a diving's rabbit? Or does it mean that rabbit fly is because in this particular country that applies,

401
00:45:46,080 --> 00:45:51,220
there's always fly around with rabbits, so you never see a rabbit without seeing rabbit flies.

402
00:45:51,220 --> 00:45:57,900
So I ostensively defining Gotho guy by pointing to the rabbits a rabbit fly.

403
00:45:57,900 --> 00:46:07,610
And how are you going to distinguish that. Oh do I mean by Gotho die attached detached rabbit part.

404
00:46:07,610 --> 00:46:11,920
In other words, I mean part of a rabbit isn't detached from a rabbit.

405
00:46:11,920 --> 00:46:16,040
Because you never get those without seeing rabbits do you. So how do you do that.

406
00:46:16,040 --> 00:46:24,610
Avodart these functions as opposed to rabbit fly or defunct detached rabbit part you think.

407
00:46:24,610 --> 00:46:28,930
Oh shoot it. Yes. Yes.

408
00:46:28,930 --> 00:46:36,810
Well something, something like that might be a different.

409
00:46:36,810 --> 00:46:45,650
I think if you ask somebody something was dangerous, you couldn't do something bold enough states to be defined that you know something.

410
00:46:45,650 --> 00:46:50,930
I knew I was upset. I think maybe you. Fine.

411
00:46:50,930 --> 00:46:54,940
Okay. So since its definition, it can't be an explanation.

412
00:46:54,940 --> 00:47:03,660
Also, since that time we would find. Says Felicitas, all, how about the words?

413
00:47:03,660 --> 00:47:09,830
And how do you ostensibly to find the words?

414
00:47:09,830 --> 00:47:15,320
And yet somehow you managed to have the word? I tell you, it's hard to believe.

415
00:47:15,320 --> 00:47:19,400
But it wasn't because your mother simply defined it for you.

416
00:47:19,400 --> 00:47:25,300
It must be how you tell. The word is written. But of course, that's a very different thing for learning.

417
00:47:25,300 --> 00:47:40,070
Reading. Well, I said that what they've been pointing to demonstrative.

418
00:47:40,070 --> 00:47:49,490
Another question is, if we take a day like Anna, OK, it's the beginning of Anna.

419
00:47:49,490 --> 00:47:53,420
Notice I'm using quotes here, so I'm mentioning the name rather than using it.

420
00:47:53,420 --> 00:48:01,990
Does the name Anna just have a reference? And when you crossed the maybe you cross its reference.

421
00:48:01,990 --> 00:48:05,900
OK. We'll just have a sense as well. OK.

422
00:48:05,900 --> 00:48:14,870
So she is. Word.

423
00:48:14,870 --> 00:48:21,660
Silverwood. If I'm spending properly, this is his first.

424
00:48:21,660 --> 00:48:32,940
This has phosphorus. OK. Now. These you might think that they both want, but they do compete.

425
00:48:32,940 --> 00:48:38,970
So they are both names for Venus, the planet Venus, which appears both in the morning and in the evening.

426
00:48:38,970 --> 00:48:46,110
So Hesperus became associated with his Russia mining for getting Companies Leather's morning star of the Evening Star.

427
00:48:46,110 --> 00:48:52,380
But that, say, the Morning Star and Phosphorus became associated with the evening star.

428
00:48:52,380 --> 00:48:58,460
OK, so his first impulse is have the same reference.

429
00:48:58,460 --> 00:49:02,720
But you don't know that's true initially. I mean,

430
00:49:02,720 --> 00:49:10,430
imagine yourself before a solid astronomers showed that Hesperus false phosphorus that

431
00:49:10,430 --> 00:49:15,440
the saw we see in the morning is the very same style that we see in these things.

432
00:49:15,440 --> 00:49:20,990
You would have been very attracted to that. Hesperus is phosphorous, wouldn't you?

433
00:49:20,990 --> 00:49:27,170
And yet you two crossed the meaning of the word. All you need to know is its reference.

434
00:49:27,170 --> 00:49:36,050
Then surely you would have known because you know the reference of Hesperus, you know, the restaurant of phosphorus and they all the same thing.

435
00:49:36,050 --> 00:49:39,600
So you should have known that long ago. You didn't.

436
00:49:39,600 --> 00:49:47,950
So the thought is that xpress and phosphorus must have something other than reference, meaning they must have a sense as well.

437
00:49:47,950 --> 00:49:51,700
And some people thought, what was science? Is it?

438
00:49:51,700 --> 00:49:56,300
Here's Venus and Phosphorus.

439
00:49:56,300 --> 00:50:00,640
Here's one root of presentation of Venus.

440
00:50:00,640 --> 00:50:05,870
And test for us is another move to the present and to do this.

441
00:50:05,870 --> 00:50:12,170
So you could talk about me as Miss Albert, for you to talk about me as Marianne.

442
00:50:12,170 --> 00:50:20,300
In both cases, you referred to me, but you use names with different different ways of presenting.

443
00:50:20,300 --> 00:50:26,130
Take the same writer and of course, epigraph, which has numerous ways.

444
00:50:26,130 --> 00:50:34,510
OK. So I could point to you as the woman in the orange scarf or the woman sitting next to the chap with a beard and long hair

445
00:50:34,510 --> 00:50:42,800
or the woman sitting behind Donna and all these different ways of getting a few different modes of presentation of you.

446
00:50:42,800 --> 00:50:48,690
And I could associated name with each of them. It was like the woman with a pink and orange scarf.

447
00:50:48,690 --> 00:50:55,820
His suits, OK, the woman sitting next to the man with beard long hair is Jennifer.

448
00:50:55,820 --> 00:51:04,180
And then I tell you, Susan is Jennifer. I don't know why bother doing that, but that's OK.

449
00:51:04,180 --> 00:51:10,790
OK, so Postern is definition can't be an explanation of how the words refer.

450
00:51:10,790 --> 00:51:17,360
The reference of words can't be that then meaning all their own, they've got to have sense as well.

451
00:51:17,360 --> 00:51:23,720
And then of course there are different types of breakfront. OK.

452
00:51:23,720 --> 00:51:28,070
Don't stand up. Sorry to say that.

453
00:51:28,070 --> 00:51:37,580
OK. Now sit down again. Now everybody stand off these.

454
00:51:37,580 --> 00:51:42,310
Undertows said. OK.

455
00:51:42,310 --> 00:51:49,900
Now sit down, if you will. Hey, sit down.

456
00:51:49,900 --> 00:51:57,310
If your wearing colours, colours, all of us.

457
00:51:57,310 --> 00:52:08,400
That's just the timing of this. Sit down if your not Grolsch.

458
00:52:08,400 --> 00:52:22,140
We also think so. Okay. Sit down.

459
00:52:22,140 --> 00:52:52,980
If you're wearing anything brown. So you sit down and they have to sort it out, if you're worried, if you're wearing a white t shirt.

460
00:52:52,980 --> 00:53:13,130
Sit down, if you will. Wearing orange or if you've got some flak jacket or a fuel wearing a grey jumper.

461
00:53:13,130 --> 00:53:22,180
I spoke to one plus. So George is the person who is not wearing any of these things.

462
00:53:22,180 --> 00:53:26,210
Okay, so I can uniquely refer to it.

463
00:53:26,210 --> 00:53:31,900
I I tried to help you not to using the rhetoric, referring to designator,

464
00:53:31,900 --> 00:53:38,750
don't stand tall, stand up, or I can pick out Dalts by describing her uniquely.

465
00:53:38,750 --> 00:53:51,990
And I do. This is another way. Here's a smart way of doing it. It sounds like it sounds up, but there's someone else where you can jump on it.

466
00:53:51,990 --> 00:54:04,580
So smart. Nice form of government. Stands up if you're wearing a pink pink jumper over a pink and grey shirt.

467
00:54:04,580 --> 00:54:10,970
That was easy. So do you see that there's different types of references, IBRA?

468
00:54:10,970 --> 00:54:21,510
Oh, I'd like to go straight for the person. Or I could throw a net over everything and pick out just one thing by a description.

469
00:54:21,510 --> 00:54:30,290
Okay. I'm using a description to uniquely refer to so descriptions and designators as much as names from.

470
00:54:30,290 --> 00:54:36,260
But of course they they designated or refer in a completely different way, didn't they.

471
00:54:36,260 --> 00:54:43,610
So once I come up with the others like that, as we often have to use the next, but we cannot also go wrong.

472
00:54:43,610 --> 00:54:51,740
I say good person drinking martinis stand up and say you drink from the martini glass.

473
00:54:51,740 --> 00:55:00,380
But actually she's got water in a martini. And so my reference goes from very difficult questions by how far I succeeded referring to you.

474
00:55:00,380 --> 00:55:07,380
Nevertheless, if you're not drinking martini. So the description is false.

475
00:55:07,380 --> 00:55:12,560
And yet you managed to do that halfway. You've got to see what was said.

476
00:55:12,560 --> 00:55:18,060
Well, I just need to be more precise. I managed to get you even know my references.

477
00:55:18,060 --> 00:55:27,070
It wasn't that big. Yes, but.

478
00:55:27,070 --> 00:55:32,410
I thought martini.

479
00:55:32,410 --> 00:55:36,860
Okay. So lots of questions. And how do words refer?

480
00:55:36,860 --> 00:55:45,490
Now, I've just got to mind this. How do you understand the culture of one group of people say we use a theory.

481
00:55:45,490 --> 00:55:50,090
Just as I explained the physical world in terms of cause and effect,

482
00:55:50,090 --> 00:55:56,470
in terms of postulating theories and then looking for you can afford to support the fact.

483
00:55:56,470 --> 00:56:03,410
So how do I understand you? Well, I think know he's a person of a certain age of a certain time for certain.

484
00:56:03,410 --> 00:56:11,290
So when they say they're simple being this. Lots of people would say, well, actually, that's not good enough,

485
00:56:11,290 --> 00:56:19,030
because if I went to a library to understand you, well, I've got to understand you in all your individuality.

486
00:56:19,030 --> 00:56:27,200
Well, I ought to be doing this is you say something crazy instead of saying, well, this is obviously crazy.

487
00:56:27,200 --> 00:56:33,310
I'm not listening to you anymore. I've got to say, why is that rational person saying something that sounds crazy?

488
00:56:33,310 --> 00:56:37,180
I must have misunderstood. OK. So what do you mean?

489
00:56:37,180 --> 00:56:43,450
You asked another question. So this one says that we understand each other on the principle of the uniformity of nature.

490
00:56:43,450 --> 00:56:48,730
Exactly like any other parts of the physical world.

491
00:56:48,730 --> 00:56:52,690
There's no difference between you in this chair. In terms of my understanding.

492
00:56:52,690 --> 00:56:55,900
Your behaviour of charity says no.

493
00:56:55,900 --> 00:57:04,540
In order to understand things like you, I got to use the principle of charity, not just the principle of the uniformity of nature.

494
00:57:04,540 --> 00:57:12,580
And simulation theory tells me that not only have I got to use all that, I could not maybe not even.

495
00:57:12,580 --> 00:57:17,500
But I can't just do this. What I've got to do to simulate you.

496
00:57:17,500 --> 00:57:21,180
I've got to put myself in your position. And what do I do?

497
00:57:21,180 --> 00:57:28,270
Says, hey, I'm not putting myself in your position, because when I do nothing, you get me decide what I'm doing.

498
00:57:28,270 --> 00:57:36,160
So I'm trying to see the world through your eyes. So I'm not just putting myself in your position.

499
00:57:36,160 --> 00:57:44,380
I'm transforming myself into you in my imagination in order to understand what you mean.

500
00:57:44,380 --> 00:57:56,270
So when I hear you say there are tickets for Madonna tonight, instead of thinking, oh, that's interesting, I think, oh, my God.

501
00:57:56,270 --> 00:58:03,340
And I know how much stock likes Madonna. I saw and I said, Oh, Fantastic Dolls, because I transformed myself into adults.

502
00:58:03,340 --> 00:58:10,220
And I see that she's telling me this because she wants me to to infuse with her about Madonna.

503
00:58:10,220 --> 00:58:17,800
You see what I mean? So this simulation said these are three different theories about how you understand people.

504
00:58:17,800 --> 00:58:27,420
And believe me, that people are nearly as as all these theories at the moment, because I actually think that you've got to use all three.

505
00:58:27,420 --> 00:58:32,320
And it seems to me that this isn't an either or. It's definitely a three.

506
00:58:32,320 --> 00:58:35,830
But some people think that it's either one or the other.

507
00:58:35,830 --> 00:58:45,650
And whichever combination I think it is here, theory apparently projected now that it will be a simulation charity deputy, not area.

508
00:58:45,650 --> 00:58:53,360
So all sorts of permutations. But the theory of interpretation is a very big area.

509
00:58:53,360 --> 00:58:59,380
Lots of big. So we will be sure that.

510
00:58:59,380 --> 00:59:07,260
And sorry to us again. This will be years before that.

511
00:59:07,260 --> 00:59:14,030
I don't need not be sure about this, not because I mean it it was I would say you were not an actual English speaker.

512
00:59:14,030 --> 00:59:20,370
I've no idea what you are not. But you have to learn English from a dictionary and ta door to door.

513
00:59:20,370 --> 00:59:28,440
And I said his handwriting is excellent. You use of theory.

514
00:59:28,440 --> 00:59:32,330
Theory. She's speaking English with the Swedish census.

515
00:59:32,330 --> 00:59:37,190
We can get anywhere with it. But you said charity. You might see that.

516
00:59:37,190 --> 00:59:41,750
The answer I'm giving is not an answer to the question, but would you understand me.

517
00:59:41,750 --> 00:59:45,150
You specifically. Well, again, would you understand the answer?

518
00:59:45,150 --> 00:59:52,080
No. So I think these are perhaps, you know, it was a combination of necessary conditions from the study.

519
00:59:52,080 --> 00:59:58,080
But I doubt I think it would be much impossible to get any serious meaning which would

520
00:59:58,080 --> 01:00:03,450
guarantee that way to know the theory that would be sufficient to understand anyone.

521
01:00:03,450 --> 01:00:11,400
Could I speak English pretty well? But that doesn't guarantee that I understand things that you can say to me.

522
01:00:11,400 --> 01:00:21,010
But up to now, I was reading one language, one that we were fun as understanding with which you could sign, which also side of things.

523
01:00:21,010 --> 01:00:32,200
And. Well, as I said, I'm not saying that it's not just language you're on to something.

524
01:00:32,200 --> 01:00:36,240
So just like you don't stand there either. OK.

525
01:00:36,240 --> 01:00:48,000
Let's move on to Biden's left. All of this lost his mind, focuses on questions like what is a mental state?

526
01:00:48,000 --> 01:00:56,170
OK. This is a mental state. How does the mental interact with the physical?

527
01:00:56,170 --> 01:01:01,270
What's the nature of rationality and consciousness? I'm going to look at this, I think.

528
01:01:01,270 --> 01:01:09,430
Yes. You know, each of them separately, briefly faces look at nature of mental states.

529
01:01:09,430 --> 01:01:17,740
Descartes thinks that the mind is quite distinct from the body, but they are not the same thing me.

530
01:01:17,740 --> 01:01:27,830
And the reason that he thinks that, if you remember, is because he opens up between the mind and the world.

531
01:01:27,830 --> 01:01:32,620
And, in fact, that this is a pussy cat. A demon.

532
01:01:32,620 --> 01:01:37,420
Okay. But let's think about this for a minute.

533
01:01:37,420 --> 01:01:45,710
In the world, we thought things like patterns, sheds, human bodies.

534
01:01:45,710 --> 01:01:52,510
We've got relations between these things like causation.

535
01:01:52,510 --> 01:02:00,670
So there are events like sounds that spatial relations.

536
01:02:00,670 --> 01:02:05,950
So Anna is sitting on a chair or there's a human body sitting on a chair.

537
01:02:05,950 --> 01:02:16,480
So there's spatial relations between these things. There are temporal relations between events.

538
01:02:16,480 --> 01:02:24,790
OK. Now, let's look at the mind. What sorts of objects or mental objects?

539
01:02:24,790 --> 01:02:31,840
I'll give you their beliefs. Sombat desires intentions.

540
01:02:31,840 --> 01:02:35,860
OK. These are mental states. Now over.

541
01:02:35,860 --> 01:02:42,850
I'm sorry. I've got to go to Portland.

542
01:02:42,850 --> 01:02:49,680
OK, fair enough. Now all of these blue.

543
01:02:49,680 --> 01:02:56,970
Called Square is completely wrong, isn't it?

544
01:02:56,970 --> 01:03:02,630
Lots of the properties of mental things. I think it would take me out of belief at the moment.

545
01:03:02,630 --> 01:03:08,720
What sort of property does a belief have? This belief is strong.

546
01:03:08,720 --> 01:03:15,460
Strong. Yes, they put their degrees of certainty to report.

547
01:03:15,460 --> 01:03:27,440
So because it's probably physically for virtual certainty, let's say three justifications to justify sorry, said it's going to be.

548
01:03:27,440 --> 01:03:35,270
I think isn't that sad, no. Oh, thank you. I've I've got a justification because colours come in intensities, too, and it's different.

549
01:03:35,270 --> 01:03:45,090
But they used. Simply, Spliffs saw show halls.

550
01:03:45,090 --> 01:03:50,000
Justified or unjustified? True or false? What else are they?

551
01:03:50,000 --> 01:03:54,710
Four o'clock is over at 8:00. You could say that.

552
01:03:54,710 --> 01:04:00,210
Yes, I was born eight. OK. What else, Solveig?

553
01:04:00,210 --> 01:04:07,920
Unfair. I'm not sure beliefs or fair intentions might be.

554
01:04:07,920 --> 01:04:15,980
Beliefs just seem to be truth related. Well, do you really?

555
01:04:15,980 --> 01:04:22,910
Again, that would be degrees of justification. It is an untested belief, would be an unjustified.

556
01:04:22,910 --> 01:04:28,550
They have content that they have intentionality to use a technical term.

557
01:04:28,550 --> 01:04:34,300
You can't have a belief that doesn't have a content. Can you? OK, do you have a brief?

558
01:04:34,300 --> 01:04:40,130
It doesn't have the content. The chair is blue or dots wearing pink or pieces wearing blue.

559
01:04:40,130 --> 01:04:52,860
Every belief has got to have a content hasseltine. That means it's got to have intentionality on quality of explicit.

560
01:04:52,860 --> 01:04:57,590
Today is the technical term for it. All it means is about this.

561
01:04:57,590 --> 01:05:03,720
Everybody has a this. This is got to be about something or other.

562
01:05:03,720 --> 01:05:09,510
OK, what about relations between these tables? I mean, do they have spatial relations?

563
01:05:09,510 --> 01:05:21,050
Do you want to leave on top of another? You can metaphorically, perhaps one one is coming on top of another thing.

564
01:05:21,050 --> 01:05:28,320
Not necessarily. Can you? Can you believe somebody did number one cheque signs and other?

565
01:05:28,320 --> 01:05:36,740
You can have one head in the side of that chart. Can you please sign your children that late again?

566
01:05:36,740 --> 01:05:38,830
Metaphorically, but not literally.

567
01:05:38,830 --> 01:05:47,850
I think that ought to be spatial relations here in the mind that businesses are on top of a belief, gets a new attention.

568
01:05:47,850 --> 01:05:58,590
Installing does not take so thoroughly to the other temporal relations to these.

569
01:05:58,590 --> 01:06:02,740
One thing they're not to be superseded by another.

570
01:06:02,740 --> 01:06:09,880
They're all temporarily sold between medals. And so I had that desire before I hold that we.

571
01:06:09,880 --> 01:06:16,980
Not for nothing. But I will say this on. So there are temporal relations.

572
01:06:16,980 --> 01:06:22,500
There's another type of relation to beliefs and desires and lives on rational relations.

573
01:06:22,500 --> 01:06:36,690
Normally, I made you tell me that. But we haven't got time. So if I say if the dog barks, if we're strangers, don't dog.

574
01:06:36,690 --> 01:06:41,250
They're all strangers. Therefore, the dog will fall. OK.

575
01:06:41,250 --> 01:06:46,020
There are rational relations between those two beliefs. We talked about what we did contract.

576
01:06:46,020 --> 01:06:51,660
So if the first two beliefs are true, the third will be true.

577
01:06:51,660 --> 01:06:55,170
So there are rational relations between beliefs. OK.

578
01:06:55,170 --> 01:07:03,180
Now let's look at this again. Do pairs Paganism shares for international relations?

579
01:07:03,180 --> 01:07:07,770
No. Okay. Do penance have intentionality?

580
01:07:07,770 --> 01:07:12,930
Are they about things? No. They do.

581
01:07:12,930 --> 01:07:18,000
Human volunteers have rational relations with each other.

582
01:07:18,000 --> 01:07:29,090
I'm not we might be reminded us here. Human bodies have spatial relations that they I'm in front of.

583
01:07:29,090 --> 01:07:32,670
I fructify. So human bodies are.

584
01:07:32,670 --> 01:07:44,740
Is my mind in front of Ivy's mind. It would be very funny thing to say once it happens to be true.

585
01:07:44,740 --> 01:07:48,910
Is this pen? It may make a sentence, true?

586
01:07:48,910 --> 01:07:55,720
Michael, is this pen is blue. It's made true by this. But it is not itself true.

587
01:07:55,720 --> 01:07:59,590
If there weren't any beliefs and battle sentences with express beliefs,

588
01:07:59,590 --> 01:08:11,790
there wouldn't be any truth of one major question here is many beliefs cause all that causal racial relations between beliefs.

589
01:08:11,790 --> 01:08:19,390
What do you think? OK, you're right.

590
01:08:19,390 --> 01:08:24,520
But actually, causation within the mind is usually a malfunction.

591
01:08:24,520 --> 01:08:35,600
If my desire that my husband is is having no [INAUDIBLE] affair, no [INAUDIBLE] cause, it's my belief that he isn't having an affair.

592
01:08:35,600 --> 01:08:42,760
OK. I'm I. There's something going right here.

593
01:08:42,760 --> 01:08:47,270
It distances it because the fact is that they desire that my husband isn't coming

594
01:08:47,270 --> 01:08:52,230
to the there is no reason at all for the belief he isn't having an affair.

595
01:08:52,230 --> 01:08:56,790
Is it? What I thought there is is wishful thinking on the creation.

596
01:08:56,790 --> 01:09:02,590
One belief can cause another simply because I'm associated with the two beliefs in my mind.

597
01:09:02,590 --> 01:09:07,160
But also the relation you want between your beliefs and the deed to your designs,

598
01:09:07,160 --> 01:09:13,480
to these sort of disfunctional relations, not simply causal relations.

599
01:09:13,480 --> 01:09:21,990
Sometimes, you know, there's nothing wrong necessarily with having causal relationship between your association is quite useful in many cases,

600
01:09:21,990 --> 01:09:26,910
but actually without reason you'd be in serious trouble.

601
01:09:26,910 --> 01:09:31,020
It's rational relationship between your beliefs, not false ones.

602
01:09:31,020 --> 01:09:36,860
So why do you always obfuscate all mental states, physical states?

603
01:09:36,860 --> 01:09:48,030
Well, the physical things like Penn just didn't seem to have any of the properties or relations that mental state

604
01:09:48,030 --> 01:09:55,470
mental states like beliefs don't seem to have any of the properties or relations the physical state is going for.

605
01:09:55,470 --> 01:10:00,840
So please call me blue or square or honourable. Sue Moss.

606
01:10:00,840 --> 01:10:07,500
We think that mental states, all of the very same thing as physical states.

607
01:10:07,500 --> 01:10:15,510
And yet. Well, coming up, we're about the first generation who has assumed the mental states,

608
01:10:15,510 --> 01:10:21,520
all physical states, because we know that the brain is very important to the mind.

609
01:10:21,520 --> 01:10:35,050
And we just assumed that all but they all seem to agree on what they say as far as what's being said to my crochets.

610
01:10:35,050 --> 01:10:44,170
Oh, boy. My next report.

611
01:10:44,170 --> 01:10:50,370
For me, yes, sir.

612
01:10:50,370 --> 01:10:58,940
So when you hear people on the television said the word brain instead of mine, you can say, oh, they shouldn't be doing that at all.

613
01:10:58,940 --> 01:11:03,410
What do you make yourself? You should be ashamed of yourself.

614
01:11:03,410 --> 01:11:13,190
It may be that mental states turn out to be physical states, but actually it's hugely unlikely that they will.

615
01:11:13,190 --> 01:11:22,170
And if you study philosophy in mind for any length of time, you will see the need to physicalism the idea that mental states are physical state.

616
01:11:22,170 --> 01:11:29,130
So my belief that P is nothing more than a brain state of mind.

617
01:11:29,130 --> 01:11:35,290
You'll see that actually that's hugely unlikely. It's not a reason to think it's unlikely.

618
01:11:35,290 --> 01:11:42,550
Okay, I. But let's you stop. She said, I think. I probably I'm thinking about Doc now.

619
01:11:42,550 --> 01:11:50,770
I'm thinking the dot is wearing a pink jumper. Now if dot ts.

620
01:11:50,770 --> 01:11:57,140
Cordylines. Very funny.

621
01:11:57,140 --> 01:12:06,120
Do you think got. I have a belief like capons, I could have a belief about a woman wearing pants sitting in front of me.

622
01:12:06,120 --> 01:12:11,670
In other words, I could give a brief description of someone very similar to the opposite.

623
01:12:11,670 --> 01:12:17,070
But could I have the belief that Dalt is wearing a pink jumper?

624
01:12:17,070 --> 01:12:21,720
I have a belief about tot's arsehole. A dog doesn't exist.

625
01:12:21,720 --> 01:12:27,630
No, it doesn't seem I could provide. Well, if that's true, given the time, I would have.

626
01:12:27,630 --> 01:12:34,800
We'll take a break. Stay tight. Outfits underpinning my belief about thoughts wearing.

627
01:12:34,800 --> 01:12:38,220
I could talk about couldn't find whether Toltz existed or not.

628
01:12:38,220 --> 01:12:46,830
Because what goes on inside my brain, this is goes on quite independently of DOT's existence or not.

629
01:12:46,830 --> 01:12:50,260
And yet I couldn't have a belief about to alter it.

630
01:12:50,260 --> 01:13:02,040
Dot didn't exist. So my having a belief is been true of Marianne that she has a belief about dolls is dependent upon the existence of thought.

631
01:13:02,040 --> 01:13:11,280
Whereas Mayan's having the brains states for those opinions, her belief about Dalt is completely independent and dalts existence or not.

632
01:13:11,280 --> 01:13:16,860
So how can that brain state be the very same thing as liability?

633
01:13:16,860 --> 01:13:22,140
It could be. So it may well be that brain brain states,

634
01:13:22,140 --> 01:13:32,340
all necessary conditions that have in place that the relation between the brain states hugely important, which is not one of identity.

635
01:13:32,340 --> 01:13:40,650
They are not the same thing. So when you hear yourself using brain states when you should be using mental states,

636
01:13:40,650 --> 01:13:45,640
you'll spot yourself in the wrist and say Mariamne like that, you'll stop doing it.

637
01:13:45,640 --> 01:13:50,860
If you want to understand more about why you should do a. Also philosophy of mind.

638
01:13:50,860 --> 01:13:57,130
Well, they pick your courses that have to be because somebody beliefs foreign policy states.

639
01:13:57,130 --> 01:14:00,620
OK. Is your mind. Oh.

640
01:14:00,620 --> 01:14:07,230
Now we've asked an interesting question that you've asked. Where in space is my mind.

641
01:14:07,230 --> 01:14:17,490
But mine's potential into spatial relations. So your because your hopefully the mind is on the model of a physical object.

642
01:14:17,490 --> 01:14:26,530
You're asking a question. That would be a question you obviously have because no physical object could exist without existing in space.

643
01:14:26,530 --> 01:14:31,200
But the question of whether a mind exists in space. What do you want to say?

644
01:14:31,200 --> 01:14:37,360
I have to say mindstate exist is.

645
01:14:37,360 --> 01:14:44,040
Did he call him last? That is also why they didn't exist where two live events were in special occasions.

646
01:14:44,040 --> 01:14:53,120
If the minds were afraid, then my mind would be inside my head as I was, if my mind were inside my head.

647
01:14:53,120 --> 01:14:59,380
My belief that doctors wearing a pink jumper would also be a suicide.

648
01:14:59,380 --> 01:15:07,000
No, because my belief the dots were each of us couldn't exist unless Dot existed.

649
01:15:07,000 --> 01:15:16,640
Whereas everything that's in my head, it exists independently of existing.

650
01:15:16,640 --> 01:15:25,910
That's true. But the husband and wife are married and the husband called their husband without his wife or the husband is independent, told his wife.

651
01:15:25,910 --> 01:15:33,020
Do you see what I mean? The man who is the husband could exist independently, but he couldn't be explained without talking so severely.

652
01:15:33,020 --> 01:15:45,130
The brain state that underpins my belief that Stolte is where anything could exist without being of belief that the is wearing a jumper.

653
01:15:45,130 --> 01:16:04,480
Yes, I didn't think. Well, I'm not buying old stuff because I take myself to Humboldt's that that's all right.

654
01:16:04,480 --> 01:16:09,480
And if you want to do more than if it's a question of going to a castle, because,

655
01:16:09,480 --> 01:16:17,700
I mean, if you're I can see from your expression in your city that they can help.

656
01:16:17,700 --> 01:16:22,020
You can't find the holes in the argument. I'm hitting you at the moment.

657
01:16:22,020 --> 01:16:26,700
But bloody hell, that must be one, because, of course, my mind is the brain, for goodness sake.

658
01:16:26,700 --> 01:16:31,920
That's a girl thing. Yeah.

659
01:16:31,920 --> 01:16:36,020
All right. Lots of you are OK.

660
01:16:36,020 --> 01:16:41,820
We're not going to get into this because we've only got ten minutes left. But I hope I'm excited.

661
01:16:41,820 --> 01:16:48,160
You want the question that the boys multi-colour them, because that's what this question is, is the minds.

662
01:16:48,160 --> 01:16:50,580
Same thing, things that. Right. That should be the mind.

663
01:16:50,580 --> 01:16:59,400
Body problem is the mind brain of somebody who will think the mind that actually you can't say that the mind is the brain.

664
01:16:59,400 --> 01:17:06,890
If you can say that the mind visit is a sophisticated computer, this is another question.

665
01:17:06,890 --> 01:17:28,280
I think I. Let me just cheque where I'm. No, I'm going to skip the minds of computers and I just say look at.

666
01:17:28,280 --> 01:17:32,050
I'm going to go on to. How does the mental interact with his day?

667
01:17:32,050 --> 01:17:38,380
Of course, it's proof of corneal glands. Touch points to.

668
01:17:38,380 --> 01:17:43,760
For reasons I'm not going to bother to tell you straight on this.

669
01:17:43,760 --> 01:17:51,690
I sense that there are rational relations between mental states and there are also relations between physical states.

670
01:17:51,690 --> 01:17:58,250
Greedo are also causal relations between the mind, but they seem to be malfunctions.

671
01:17:58,250 --> 01:18:06,140
But if the mind is going to be physical, I mean, if we are going to be physically solved some kind,

672
01:18:06,140 --> 01:18:17,290
then we would want to say that physical states and to international relations or again, we've got to deny the mental states, physical states.

673
01:18:17,290 --> 01:18:23,030
Well, how can physical states enter into relations with 3-D?

674
01:18:23,030 --> 01:18:31,650
How can. Physical states entail another company to physical states, speed consistent with each other.

675
01:18:31,650 --> 01:18:37,420
I be both true at the same time, a physical state isn't true at all.

676
01:18:37,420 --> 01:18:45,410
So if so, how? But if you're going to say that the physical state, our mental state, it's all physical sex.

677
01:18:45,410 --> 01:18:50,320
Also two reasons, all causes.

678
01:18:50,320 --> 01:18:56,020
In other words, the rationality is not a function of something peculiar.

679
01:18:56,020 --> 01:19:01,670
I don't mind. It's a function of certain types of physical.

680
01:19:01,670 --> 01:19:06,480
So Chesterton's interactional relations. But your brain states, too.

681
01:19:06,480 --> 01:19:10,840
OK. You see, somehow we've got to show that.

682
01:19:10,840 --> 01:19:16,570
So believe me, it's not as easy to show as you might think.

683
01:19:16,570 --> 01:19:28,670
I can't remember what the exclusion was. So I'm afraid, again, you'll have to come to a vote on.

684
01:19:28,670 --> 01:19:35,580
I can do it for you, I take. OK.

685
01:19:35,580 --> 01:19:40,880
Isn't all of the mental states, all physical states, OK?

686
01:19:40,880 --> 01:19:49,190
His race is his mental state on this.

687
01:19:49,190 --> 01:19:57,510
So this is the point of all.

688
01:19:57,510 --> 01:20:11,460
He is designed to attract. But this is a dispute on his brain.

689
01:20:11,460 --> 01:20:24,670
A. Now, when this happens, we say that Mario is waving her arm because she wants to attract lots of attention.

690
01:20:24,670 --> 01:20:29,210
OK, so the suggestion that this is the cause of the.

691
01:20:29,210 --> 01:20:33,620
Oh, wait, wait, wait. OK, but we all know.

692
01:20:33,620 --> 01:20:42,610
But actually, I wouldn't have done that had brain states and not formed in my way.

693
01:20:42,610 --> 01:20:49,690
So surely brain state aid is a cause of the way you feel.

694
01:20:49,690 --> 01:20:59,650
Now, if you're an identity, there is there isn't any problem with this because you just say the desire to attract attention is brain state.

695
01:20:59,650 --> 01:21:05,610
And so, of course, if that causes this, this also causes it big funding, the same thing.

696
01:21:05,610 --> 01:21:07,780
You know, you're not talking about two causes here.

697
01:21:07,780 --> 01:21:14,440
You're talking about one and the same calls under different movements and presentation to the principal.

698
01:21:14,440 --> 01:21:23,450
But if you did know me that I'm not giving you several reasons to do it, you've got the exclusion problem.

699
01:21:23,450 --> 01:21:32,410
As a philosopher called King Yancoal kid, he would say that we know that this causes that.

700
01:21:32,410 --> 01:21:45,250
So you're going to deny the fact is that the idea you're going to go for epiphenomenal isn't you're going to say that one event has to exist.

701
01:21:45,250 --> 01:21:52,340
And that philosophers like that. So we want to take Ockham's Razor to Boston.

702
01:21:52,340 --> 01:22:01,850
Well, it's possible that two causes with one. And you say this being the case, that would have been the case, whether that would be the case or not.

703
01:22:01,850 --> 01:22:08,160
If you think that, then you're going to think that this becomes a phenomenal so high that you're

704
01:22:08,160 --> 01:22:15,770
postulating to causes all that you'll say the mental isn't causally efficacious and to.

705
01:22:15,770 --> 01:22:20,840
The mentor has a role to play in producing your behaviour.

706
01:22:20,840 --> 01:22:28,820
So when I walk across the stage like this, it's not because I want to demonstrate to you that the action.

707
01:22:28,820 --> 01:22:34,180
So I can say that it's my desire to do this. That's causing me to do this exactly what I did.

708
01:22:34,180 --> 01:22:40,170
Something my brain, my desires. Just sort of going along with it.

709
01:22:40,170 --> 01:22:46,260
A rather is the shadow of a call. And it's not like the patience for the voice goes with the call.

710
01:22:46,260 --> 01:22:52,610
So my mental states sort of just know causally inert.

711
01:22:52,610 --> 01:23:02,830
They cause nothing. And this is. And there's a huge amount of evidence.

712
01:23:02,830 --> 01:23:22,720
Sorry, I'm not allowed to see it in the brain because it is not an issue that is so hard that I know that there is.

713
01:23:22,720 --> 01:23:28,670
I believe if you look at them from the point of view of those, all three thought it was right.

714
01:23:28,670 --> 01:23:32,510
You've got to ask what intention is before you guys.

715
01:23:32,510 --> 01:23:40,830
We've got a. Strange in London, it has been a nice day.

716
01:23:40,830 --> 01:23:52,070
I know the same state has been replicated today because there's an experiment being conducted in this interpretation of the experiments.

717
01:23:52,070 --> 01:24:00,360
There's nothing wrong with the experiment. The experiment shows what it is and has been replicated many times.

718
01:24:00,360 --> 01:24:05,280
The interpretation of the experiments is so easy to showcase.

719
01:24:05,280 --> 01:24:16,200
No, I'm not going to stop it. OK, so the exclusion argument leads either to the idea that mental saiz of physical seats,

720
01:24:16,200 --> 01:24:23,550
which is what hidden claims or if for the other reasons I've given you don't like the idea of mental states aren't.

721
01:24:23,550 --> 01:24:28,390
This is a story on physical states. It leads you to act as an organism.

722
01:24:28,390 --> 01:24:35,310
All you've got to tell some completely different story about how recent some causes all the same thing.

723
01:24:35,310 --> 01:24:48,640
So we don't like. OK, so that's all we have to do in five minutes, right?

724
01:24:48,640 --> 01:24:59,020
We're really just concerned. I've already talked about Charles.

725
01:24:59,020 --> 01:25:02,520
At the moment is something that has to do, of course,

726
01:25:02,520 --> 01:25:14,170
would affect so shattered who is the phenomena of the 40s so everybody might have a causal impact on something but the champagne flute.

727
01:25:14,170 --> 01:25:23,880
See what I mean? So the idea is that my brain, because, of course, in fact, my mind to as an active phenomenon doesn't.

728
01:25:23,880 --> 01:25:41,010
So the mind is. Main is all about it.

729
01:25:41,010 --> 01:25:49,320
We've got this thing.

730
01:25:49,320 --> 01:25:56,460
Mental brain is called the brain change, the mind is a mental.

731
01:25:56,460 --> 01:26:07,040
OK. Try not to touch. There is this suggests that the same thing I've noticed here is that the exclusion of problem suggests good lines.

732
01:26:07,040 --> 01:26:15,650
Great. I do the same thing. But if you believe the reasons I gave poor about why the why isn't the brain that

733
01:26:15,650 --> 01:26:20,470
you'll think that the execution problem shows not that the mind is the brain,

734
01:26:20,470 --> 01:26:31,620
but that the mind is an anomaly. And then there are other theories that say we can get over the exclusion of them and show with it.

735
01:26:31,620 --> 01:26:40,820
Beliefs. And here's a reason for thinking the beliefs are causally efficacious.

736
01:26:40,820 --> 01:26:48,140
Let's say that I see others doing something and I interpret that as an.

737
01:26:48,140 --> 01:26:54,190
But they use this. And I think I back to the families.

738
01:26:54,190 --> 01:27:02,030
This is the way to this. I'll get that. Are you following here?

739
01:27:02,030 --> 01:27:14,580
I might then do that. Now, one of the causes of my action was Anna's belief that whatever accounts, people's minds, everything.

740
01:27:14,580 --> 01:27:19,120
OK. Right. But you'll lose me if you do that. Okay.

741
01:27:19,120 --> 01:27:27,710
So I just believe that it causes me to do something. Now, even if others believe the P is a physical state of.

742
01:27:27,710 --> 01:27:34,560
I don't know what that physical state is. How could that physical state have caused me to do anything?

743
01:27:34,560 --> 01:27:39,160
But others believe the piece isn't reducible to some behavioural states.

744
01:27:39,160 --> 01:27:43,940
Which, of course, I can see. But it isn't useful.

745
01:27:43,940 --> 01:27:53,090
So how can others believe you? Of course, it's the only thing that could have caused these people if I did is seeing and under

746
01:27:53,090 --> 01:27:59,660
a particular description where that description is us having the belief that.

747
01:27:59,660 --> 01:28:03,500
So I but believe has causal efficacy of what you cannot say.

748
01:28:03,500 --> 01:28:09,750
It's on his brain. Is causing me to do anything. My brain might be causing me to do something.

749
01:28:09,750 --> 01:28:13,860
But it certainly isn't. You would think so.

750
01:28:13,860 --> 01:28:18,920
His brain doesn't cause me to do anything, but I'm his beliefs.

751
01:28:18,920 --> 01:28:26,990
I often act alone as belief. I don't believe that I wanted to get something else we can and pay it off with it and indeed gave me this.

752
01:28:26,990 --> 01:28:32,440
And it's honest, my belief that I don't believe that. You see what I mean?

753
01:28:32,440 --> 01:28:34,790
They've got me to do something. So.

754
01:28:34,790 --> 01:28:44,330
So even if you think even if you think the exclusion of the children are split on my beliefs called cause me to act,

755
01:28:44,330 --> 01:28:49,490
it shows nothing at all about whether it's honestly could cause them to act on.

756
01:28:49,490 --> 01:28:53,370
It seems to be they obviously do anyway that we.

757
01:28:53,370 --> 01:28:58,370
Well, that's the end. You go to more philosophy.

758
01:28:58,370 --> 01:29:06,720
That's all you're ever going to know. No, I won't talk to you.

759
01:29:06,720 --> 01:29:27,942
Oh, my. That's what I think.