Alexis McLeod
speaker
771 appearances
4 recordings
1 series
first heard Apr 2018
last heard Apr 2020
Alexis McLeod’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
So I wonder could you say something about the uh the the particular philosophical concerns that led Mukala and other other Indian philosophers to have the kind of concern w concerns with language that they do, um especially his concerns with with uh with language?
Was it grounded in in ethical concerns or religious concerns or concerns of as you mentioned before, poetry, things like this?
So this this uh this distinction that you talk about um that Mukala makes and others about primary and secondary meat uh meaning, you mentioned you talk a little bit about how this looks like um and I and I found interesting the connection between this and and sense and reference.
And I know there was a couple of places that in the text where you where you talked about the dangers of p putting too cl you know, bringing too close together kind of c conceptions that we have in analytic philosophy and then the what what was going on in early India.
But to what we're doing.
To what extent were those close and what was the primary and secondary meaning distinction that that they were getting at there?
So w one thing that I I found really interesting was this idea that the the primary meaning of a word like cow, something like this, could be a universal and that a particular referent, like a particular cow, would have to be through some implied or or secondary meaning.
Does does Mukala associate uh so he he has this concern with poetic meaning as you were talking about, does he associate that meaning with the kind of secondary meaning that that the use of cow might have if it's meant to refer to the individual?
Um or w and why does he make this move of taking words like like cow to primarily indicate universals rather than particulars?
One one thing that I thought was interesting, you talked about uh relatively early on in the book that you've got this kind of third mode of uh signification or meaning, right?
Where you d so you've got the primary and the secondary, and then there's this then there's something suggestion, um, which Mukala rejects.
Um could you explain this controversy about suggestion and why and why Mukala rejects this category?
I wonder do you think that uh that Mukala's solution there is is kind of fits better with uh in kind of contemporary c uh context and philosophy of language than 'cause it seems like it m people might be more willing to take something like that on.
One of the one of the things that I thought was interesting that you did toward the end was to kind of bring in the comparative uh aspect and talking about kind of comp comparing Mokullah to to some of what's going on in contemporary philosophy.
And you there was one point at which you compared uh uh Mukala's views to those of Francois Reconati and you said on concerning on what is said in a statement, which was interesting you discussed a a syncretic view that he mentions, um that he ultimately rejects.
I wonder if you could say something a bit about what that view is and and is is this something like y do you take this to be something like what's going on
in
Absolutely.
I mean the the kind of asking new questions, right, when we see the different contexts and the different kinds of philosophy that are being done in in India and China and elsewhere, I think is is really important.
And that's something I think your book can really can really help uh help in in with contemporary philosophy.
Showing 181–200 of 771 · page 10 of 39
← Previous
Next →