Schroder sq and the new talea

Atmasphere, Your Quine (assuming your are American) is a
philosopher, logician and mathemtathician. He made very important contributions to i.a.the philosophy of lanquage.
Since Frege this ,say, discipline is a scientific undertaking. I admire Quine very much and made much effort
to understand his work (mathematics not included). But he
has made many contributions to linquistics wich is certainly a science. Where would you drow the line?
I myself am sure that the results reached by the modern philosophy of lanquage belong to knowledge. I am not Popperian but look at his,uh, conceptions reg. refutation,confirmation and objective knowledge.
He btw borowed 'objective knowledge' from Frege ('the third world') Now deed you ever heard about confirmation or refutation of literary works? There is no problem at all to provide for arts of any kind. This is our cultural heritage that we all care for and admire.
In the same sence as scientific knowledge belongs to us all
this applys for arts. But they are to me different categorys. The arts don't belong to objective knowledge.
The word 'objective' in the 'conjunction' should point at
this fact. Ie they lack confirmation and refutation in scientific sence.

Regards,

Asa, Nandric, Rudolf Steiner found for himself - and thus for us... - the fixed point in philosophy and supplied thus the fix point so desperately longed for by Immanuel Kant.
In his "Philosophie der Freiheit" (philosophy of freedom) he identified the process of thinking as the fix point per se.
An interesting approach which stroke me directly when I first encountered it decades back at the age of 17.
Certainly worth to muse about in the context of the last 15 posts in particular and in general anyway....;-) ...
To meditate about this "concept" might give to many answers to many questions.
BTW - Nandric, the 2 billion dollars you quote at cost for the particle accelerator in the soil underneath Cern are misleading for americans. It is 2000 billion dollars in fact ( a "billion" in american english is the same as 1 Milliarde in german/dutch - strange side way in mathematic ).

Is there such thing as "non-cognitive" knowledge........ intuition?
Personally I like to see pure and straight intuition as being exactly that - non-personalized and objective knowledge NOT blinded/fooled by an individual matrix.
Or maybe the commonsense "sphere" surrounding mother earth and named "aether". A kind of extra-spiritual universal master-brain of human experience past and present. In the sense that it compound ALL human souls/spirits and their gained knowledge which is non-focussed on life and individual existence. Postulated by Rudolf Steiner ( again...) and believed by anthroposophy to be available to every human soul.
Wished it was.

I want to note, that I am very positive surprised by the posts which up the past 2 days. Seems after all, that there is true life on earth and that there are actually many audiophiles who see way past the platter of a turntable ...;-) ......

Finally - that specific ars germanicum "gladius" was just an example for "inherent quality" - nothing more and nothing less..........

Nandric, I hope one would not attempt to refute a literary work but simply enjoy it for what it is. We certainly do that with a fine wine :)

Philosophy is much the same idea- it is not knowledge (although it can and does get applied to knowledge- for example my philosophy is to use differential circuits as much as I can), but can be amusing nevertheless along the way. As such, Bill Wattersonhttp://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/ (Calvin and Hobbes fame) does as well as the best I saw from my college days...

Asa, No discussion but some hints regarding Wittgenstein.
You can find (Google) by Frege the corresopndence with Wittgenstein about Tractatus. To my mind very painful for
'the greatest phylosopher of the 20 century'. Regarding
the later Wittgenstein you should use your own 'seen' and
try to 'see' with your mental eye what will be involved in
reserching 'lanquage games' in,say, China.

Regards,

Dgarretson, the wide variation we see in pivot AND linear tonearm designs has - IMHO ... - one simple reason. There was so far never a tonearm designed with an all complete blue book.
I have so far not seen a tonearm which really addresses all issues going with the dynamic process of guiding a cartridge through the groove of a record. We have a good number of good designs which all do come close - some more, some less, - but none is complete.
The roman gladius evolved during centuries and changed - depending on changes in battle tactics, associated equipment, wealth, availability and new alloys.
As did all weapon in human history. That specific ars germanicum gladius was just an example for "inherent quality/value" in a superior tool ( in its time frame ).
BTW - have you ever fought or used any sword of times past? Try fight - or simulate to do so ... - with norman shield and sword of the 11th/12th century. Most of us won't be able to handle it at all - because of the sheer weight and poor balance - for a minute.
The gladius I was referring to, was the result of a complete - if never written - blue book. That "in-mind blue book" was the result of experience, clear view on the topic and most undisturbed by personal preference or image.

Tonearm design will evolve further. In very small steps. But I am still confident, that we will see a tonearm design one day in the not so far future which does address all issues. Yes, the debate continues about short vs long, pivot vs linear etc. - a complete blue book would end that discussion. Lucky us, we don't have that blue book ...;-) .... for the true audiophile it would be the worst case scenario.
It is much more fun to debate about almost-perfect-designs then to fall victim to a complete solution which would - shudder... - end all discussion.
But since we talk products, that will never happen.
Even a "perfect" tonearm would not be widely recognized as such.
Because many people would refuse to accept it.
Even a "perfect" tonearm would only have its share of the market and would have still a few competitors.
As the product's success is always a matter of market request/call.
The market NEVER asks for a perfect solution.

And - there was no "simple kill-shot of Gladius" ....... that wasn't its only nor prime purpose.