On ''what there is''

It is easy to claim common place fact like unicorn dont exist but Higgs boson exist by the proven construct of Cern detector...

And very easy to say common place fact like: "One should discriminate between
talking about language (aka ’’meaning’’) and extra linguistic
reality."

Typical second rate nominalism will not be enough though.... (If you cant understand Goethe try Charles Sanders Peirce to understand why nominalism is not enough)

Man is not a "tabula rasa" as think people like behaviorists Skinner or Quine when they speak of language acquisition...

Cassirer explain very deeply after Buhler why symbolic competence is behind consciousness speech act and any human activity ...

I suggest Chomsky to correct your Quinean view of language, if Peirce, Buhler, or Cassirer are too "heavy" for you ...

For example : P.Swiggers: "How Chomsky skinned Quine"

"BTW the lack of knowledge by ’’some’’ members is disturbing. "

Perhaps it is my posts which pointed toward something that is not "common place" and trivial fact like yours...

Perhaps it is you who dont understand them at all.... Because for example language cannot be understood only by this childish evident distinction between external meaning and an external object... Study one of the greatest linguist of the century : Gustave Guillaume...If you dont read french try Karl Buhler...

Perhaps there is also something called " consciousness" which is not the product of matter or linguistic playing....

Read Goethe and learn about it....If you dont understand Goethe try Husserl Or Cassirer...
I will be here to help you...

I will recommend to you a physicist who wrote many books about Goethe because instead of insulting people about their alleged ignorance i prefer to help them...

Henry Bortoft....

I think there is a lot of drunk posting on this one.

 I am always drunk when i listen to music, and i always listen music when i post here....

😊

I read some of the works referenced in this thread. Well over my head. 

Where does the thing we refer to as our ‘spirit’ originate? That always puzzles me.

The French ''enlightenment'' is understood in some countries
as ''well-read'' in contraposition to ''poorly educated''. This
explains high expectation from ''literature'' to explain the
world. Hence ''tell me what you read and I shell tell you who
you are!'' So we got ''scientist'' after their typewriters in their
study fantasizing  about  the world. There were ''readers clubs''
everywhere were newest books were discussed. The members
consider themselves  as ''elite''. So, for example, in Germany everybody knew who Goethe and Hegel was/is but hardly any
who Frege the father of modern logic is. He is, mirabile dictu,
better known in USA than Germany. So if one want to study
Frege he should first learn English. 

WTF?