I understood so much from French because I know Italian and some words are pretty much the same(or you can figure out their meaning) and because I know math and logic (so its not very hard to understand that part). And because of that I also know that everything we say can be rappresented in logic sentences and can be proven true or false(in the mathematical sense).
First of all I am not trying to prove you wrong. I find the way you think interesting, that's why I'm trying to understand it.
The language in general(whichever that is French, English,etc.) for you its just a way to communicate with others. But also any language isn't very strict in the meanings (for example in Greek there are at least five different ways to say the word rock), so many times when we talk different meanings can be "attached" to the frases according for example to the state we are in (happy,angry, blue,etc.). And with this I'm completely with you(I repeated what you said so that you will be able to understand if i understood you or not).
Furthermore, you say what can be true for me may not be true for you( that's why the word true cannot be defined strictly, and I find that also correct).But don't you ,even, take some things for true, don't you believe in some things?For example, the fact that all spoken languages are somewhat superfluous, or the fact that nothing makes sense. The first one it doesn't need much to be proven, the second one I'm trying to understand(because math does make some sense to you).
You conclude with read Nietzsce. From all I know (I've never read Nietzsce so I may be totally wrong) Nietzsce talks about existence, about the "I am" but not I am through others, the viceversa Others are because I am. So in some kind of existence you do believe.
I also got the idea from what you wrote that you are trying to define everything philosophically but under a logical point(math-logical). If that is what you are doing how can that be done? Practically it all ends up with what existence is (how the first form of life appeared, the first star and so on). The definitions given from every sector (philosophy sciences(with its subcategories) ) are completely different, just because they all are different points you see the same thing. How can they be mixed up together?
|