>
> We might as well go all the way and say that *any* concept is impossible
> to define. Doesn't Derrida theorize something along these lines? Words
> are only defined by reference to other words.
The later Wittgenstein goes in this direction as well, in his anti-essentialism. W asks what do all games have in common? W cannot find any commonality between games and there is thus no essence of the word "game". This is similiar to Plato's argument that Carrol just posted. Instead, a definition and meaning of a concept is how it is used by a community who speak the same language. W thus took the first steps towards cultural relativism and the thesis of the indeterminacy of translation. There is no universal common language or algorithm to abjudicate between rival conceptual schemes. Cross cultural comparison is therefore impossible.
I strongly disagree with this argument. Words are defined by there reference to reality. A word is given its baptism in the language with regard to what it refers to. When a person uses that word in can be traced back via a causal chain to its original baptism. Derrida and others who argue or "argue" the same point are idealists i.e. they deny the existence of the external world because there is no way language can hook onto the world. Sentences do not refer to reality but simply to other sentences. It is imperative for Marxists to argue the opposite. Language is distorted by ideology and power relations. Language ,in at least in some minimal sense, must hook onto a real state of affairs int he world so one can identify, expose and rectify ideology and power relations. This can be done by comparing the real world with language that is both deliberately and ,often unknowingly to the speaker, being used to misrepresent the real world in the name of dominant power relations. Hope this much is clear.
With regards to irony, philosophers sometimes make a distinction between speakers reference and semantic reference. Speaker reference is what the speaker is referring to and semantic reference is what the words being used commonly refer to in a language community. Irony occurs when a speaker deliberately confuses these two notions, so that the speaker reference is the opposite of the semantic reference. Hope that helps clear things up a bit.
Sam Pawlett Kim Il Sungist