> Of course Kenneth's exposition is even more absurd, "If we
> start with the IDEA of language." How odd. Do we start
> with language or do we start with the idea of language?
> One can't have it both ways.
The idea of language appears historically *after* the fact of language / communication / symbolization. It is both a presupposition *and* a performative reconstruction. So we start with the idea, filled with nonsense, fill it with sense, and contradict the idea with the content. Language is nothing more than self-relating negativity. And still, we cannot think without language, nor make sense of our surroundings.
Thoughts without a thinker? I don't think so.
I am thinking therefore I exist.
I do not exist where I am thinking.
It gets bettter: self relating negativity is creatio ex nihilo. Think about it.
ken