RT list: Gricefully Yours

In a message dated 5/17/2009 6:26:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
alessandro.capone@istruzione.it writes:

>To Speranza and all.
 
all out there. Keep mentioning that, or else they'll suggest we retreat to
my swimming-pool library. :)
 
>When you read Grice or Strawson, you breathe the air of a different world.
 
Yes. I loved your 'vel' (vide Jennings, "The Genealogy of Disjunction" --
makes sound disjunction as if she ('la disgiunzione') were a prostitute!)
 
But surely (and while I trust you did become a doctor via Sir Peter), 'no
Grice, no Strawson'. In this respect, what has been useful to me, and I hope
 relevance-theorists start quoting it one day is:
 
    Mabbott, J. D. "Oxford Memories". Oxford.
 
-- No: not Oxford University Press _or_ Blackwell: a minor press (now
second-hand books only) on High!
 
--- Mabbott, who was a Scot, mentions Grice on two pages of his book. Grice
 got to know this, and his words were (to the effect):
 
         "Good ol' Mabb: I never thought he thought so highly of me!"
 
--- Mabbott calls Grice _excellent_, and Strawson his most excellent pupil.
 But Grice got a first, Strawson a second.
 

---
 
>His prose is magisterial (who wrote it? a review I think). 
 
You mean a reviewer. But yes, 'magisterial' is a bit of a word one would  
expect from a reviewer. It's _very_ used in the Romance languages, even Greek 
 (Recall Callas, "Master classes"). I particularly don't like the idea of a 
 'master' much: recall what Grice says of not 'odium theologicum' which we 
all  have, but something he coined "amor theologicus" -- it's masculine, 
hence the  ending). I think he perceived that sort of fanaticism towards people 
like  Witters for example (Wittgenstein). 
 
His prose, as Chapman notes, _aged_ splendidly like the best wine. Chapman  
notes that from the late 1960s to the, say, 1980s: it became to be 
overpopulated  with English eccentricities, like butlers, and things. A sort of  
pro-pro-Englishness that fit the paradigm of the English 'refugee' or  
expatriate. Imagine Grice, in all his Englishness, sharing his "Department of  
Philosophy" with the _German_ expatriate (refugee?) Feyerabend...
 
>His ideas
>spread (and are spreading) all over the world and are  still propagated
>these days.
Yes, and someone _has_ to open the 13 cardboxes he left, scan the materials 
 and spread them even _further_. It is just moving for me to read (from 
Chapman)  that he _kept_ in those boxes (actually on his desk, 'Don't touch 
anything!')  papers he wrote with his parents's address on the top of it: his 
address in  Holborne, Warwickshire! So he was the living proof that he did 
think "Memory and  Personal Identity" are _interlaced_!
Capone:
 
>While surely many inferences are fast and automatic, 
 
as is food, alas.
 
>a great many are not:
>when you reason on what the [utterer]  said*, 
 
 
* or whispered. I'm presently considering reports in Italian of  
Wittgenstein's death. The wiki reads:
 
         "Un istante prima di  perdere conoscenza, 
          [Wittgenstein]  sussurrò ai presenti la sua 
          ultima frase: 
          "Dite a tutti che ho  avuto una vita meravigliosa".
 
but my friend R. Paul has bet me good money that it's most likely the  
translation from Malcolm, that uses 'said' rather than the poetic  'whisper'. R. 
Paul adds: These Italians love embellishments. No such 'tutti' in  the 
original' -- which rather dryly  reads:
Before losing  consciousness he [Wittgenstein] said 
to  Mrs. Bevan (who was with him throught the  night)
'Tell them I've had a wonderful  life!' By "them" he 
undoubtedly meant  his close friends.[p. 100]
A. Capone:
 
>the form of what [the utterer] said [or  explicated] or
>the quantity of information 
 
-- in quotes. 'information'. L. Floridi, of Oxford, has me quoted somewhere 
 to the effect that I shared with him this beautiful quote by Grice, "false 
 information is no information" (Retrospective Epilogue). So I would think  
'information' is overdone in Gricean schemes: if what is meant is the info 
that  an utterer displays this or that psychological attitude, that's fine, 
but as to  whether _it is raining_ -- escapes _me_ and my methodological 
solipsism.
 
(A good reference here is McGinn, formerly of Avramide, who notes that  
Griceans cannot escape such a solipsism -- his contribution in Woodfield,  
"Thought and Object". I used to love McGinn, and I still do, but not on Sundays. 
 His "Memoirs of a Philosopher" he has the cheek to share with the 
readership  words to that effect: "I never met Paul Grice but he had only one 
tooth". Isn't  that a _breach_ of _under-informativeness_? And rude.
 
Capone:
 
>provided, you start to 
>recognize the [utterer]'s
>intended point.
Yes, 'point' is such an excellent word. Grice refreshes it in "Aspects of  
Reason" -- He is considering what the OED has as "woman's reason" (sexist  
thing!): "I like him because I like him". Grice wonders: 'is _this_ 
reasoning?'  He goes on to say, 'yes'. "Surely my claim to fame is the importance of  
distinguishing between _point_ and truth, so I guess I'll have to swallow 
this."  I first came across a serious philosophical discussion of 'point' by, 
of all  people, Peter Winch, in that distinguished series, of the Royal 
Institute of  Philosophy -- to which he contributed expliciting crediting 
Grice. 
 
A. Capone.
>To be even more blunt, his maxims ...
 
Aren't you a bit concerned, as I am, that people who perhaps did not have a 
 serious philosophical background, use 'maxim' loosely? I do think Grice 
was  famously "echoing Kant" (by 1967). Only in 1977 (for the Immanuel Kant 
Lectures)  did he give some thought, really, to the idea of "maxim" alla Kant 
-- 'maxim of  utility', 'maxim of prudence', etc. Indeed, the magisterial 
passage from Lecture  IV to V is to _universalise_ the maxim, provided we 
interpret is as an  ultra-conditional, "If you want to be happy, ... follow the 
Cooperative  Principle". Also, as Chapman notes, he struggled quite a bit 
with terminology  here. Strictly, it's a _cooperation_ principle. How can a 
principle be  _co-operative_? Chapman cites some charming manuscripts -- very 
topical: the  _lectures_ on "Logic and Conversation" he gave _in Oxford_ (as 
'university  lecturer' that he was) between 1962 ('Causal Theory of 
Perception' published)  and his appointment as 1967 Bi-Annual W. James Lecturer). 
He speaks of  'self-love', 'benevolence' and other charmers.
 
Capone:
 
>have been 
>passed on from generation to
>generation and seem to reflect the  preoccupation of western culture with
>issues about quantity of  information and form.
Yes. Western civilisation, I'd say. As Ghandi remarked:
 
        -- And what is it, in a  nutshell, what you think
                 about Western civilisation?
 
        -- An excellent idea, that  would be.
 
 
But you are right. I think "Western" narrows it down a bit -- especially  
seeing such a representation that "RT" (relevance theory) has in China, for  
example. I think it's all, as Keenan noted (or refuted, I forget) 
'universal'.  The chapter 8 of my PhD is indeed called "The Cunning of Conversational  
Reasoning": where I consider, from a _philosophical_ rather than linguistic 
or  anthropological perspective, what one may mean by "cunning" (it's not 
your  scientist's favourite word! -- but vide M. Hollis, "The Cunning of 
Reason"). 
 
Capone:
>One area which, to my knowledge, has not been investigated, is the  study
>of the extent to which the Gricean maxims are imposed on students  in
>Western schools and Universities.
Wow! And the TOEFL! The TOEFL. Furrin students in American universities,  
for example, are required to speak better English than Americans!
 
That's what I don't like about Bologna, either: self-conceited. OTOH,  
Join-the-Swimming-Pool-Library and get an online degree on _love_.
 
---
 
Capone:
>My book in Italian, for example, was corrected by the eminent  Italian and
>Pisan scholar Riccardo Ambrosini, and his corrections seemed  to me to have
>more to do with being logical in one's talk (or writing)  than with
>grammar.
Excellent. The Pisans are said to be _extremely_ intelligent. Indeed, 'over 
 the top' if you ask me. Odd seeing their architecture (hardly straight). 
>What a pity I threw his corrections - 
 
Don't say that! That sounds like _vomited_! Try 'swallow'!
 
>they could have  
>proven the point
>that part of the Gricean heritage is a cultural  heritage.
Well, yes, but when I first read G. N. Leech (PhD UCL) I was so offended.  
He says of Italians:
 
"They will breach the conversational maxim of informativeness. Suppose we  
are in Pisa and I ask (with an American accent):
 
        A: Where is the Ponte della  Vittoria?
 
According to Leech, the Italian _will_ *lie* rather than admit she does not 
 know. I can share the feeling. First,
 
I think it's rude of people to _ask_ things to strangers. That's why  
information offices are all over the place.
 
                 Second,
 
ignoring a tourist _is_ the thing to do!
 
---
 
Ethnomethodologically, to try to describe the way from the Leaning tower to 
 the Ponte della Vittoria is _so difficult_ (such a task), and the utterer 
is to  reason:
 
   -- shall I mention units of distance?
   -- shall I use 'right' and 'left'?
   -- shall I generally _waste_ my time?
   -- etc.
   -- Is it necessary that this person reaches the  destination?
 
----
 
Capone:
 
>Of course, the reason why the maxims became part of culture is 
>simple: the way we talk and think is 
>pervaded by logical factors.
And logic _is_ love. Your rationalism would leave Grice _overwhelmed_!  
Surely _emotion_ pervades everything. Pragmatics is _all_ about emotion.  
"Alethic" is one among the many _values_. Grice _loved_ the neologism by Von  
Wright, 'alethic'. There's 'moral' values (which are hardly _logical_), there's 
 'boulemaic' values (the respect for preferences, which are not
'moral' but 'humane'), etc. Indeed, Robin Talmach, wasn't she _right_ when  
she, almost offended, said, "Surely Grice could have expanded on his terse, 
'be  polite!'.
 
Leech has this charming example:
 
    A: I'm going on a trip tomorrow. To Bari.
    B: (a) Good luck!
        (b) Bad luck!
 
(a) has to be interpreted as "Have" good luck. While (b) as "I hate Bari".  
Note that Grice would call such inferences 'nonconventional implicatures -- 
yet  not conversational'. Here he is surely being in his 'definitional' 
mode --. But  he should _know_ better. So much of _Oxford_ conversation has 
_nothing_ to do  with Co-operative! Chapman recalls how hurt Grice felt when 
back in Oxford for  the Locke Lectures (1978 -- you have to become a furriner 
first to qualify as  such a Lecturer), he was stopped at the High by 
philosophical colleagues:
 
    "I don't think I have seen you 'round here all that  often".
 
"They were blatantly denying the fact that Grice had _left_ Oxford *for  
good*!". On the other hand, Schiffer has this other charmer of an example:
 
     "We should have lunch together  sometime"
 
As Schiffer expands the implicature:
 
      "Good night -- and I hope never  our paths shall meet again."
 
Capone:
>You may start to wonder:
 
-- which _is_ the origin of our 'discipline' (for Socrates, Speranza,  
Grice, and any philosopher worth her name!).
 
>how can the single cognitive principle of 
>Relevance be reconciled with the
>gricean maxims?
Well, Grice says 'severed' or 'severe' in his "Retrospective Epilogue"  
(Strand 6). I could spend HOURS talking about that sixth strand. Sentence by  
sentence. Is he contradicting hisself? Is he being wrong? Is he being 
obdurate?  Is he being -- Gricean? (cfr. "post-Gricean", "neo-Gricean" and my kith 
and kin:  the "paleo-Gricean" -- including Aristotle!)
 
Capone:
>The gricean maxims 
 
It's perfectly alright to use the small 'g' but recall that the English are 
 like the German in that respect: it's an atavism, I think: it's never 
wednesday,  but "Wednesday" (what can be so important about a day, or a month -- 
that they  have to capitalise?). Similarly, they'll avoid 'gricean' and 
grow capitals on  it. Odd. ('grow capitals' is a Strawsonianism -- how a proper 
name becomes a  definite description). 
 
Capone:
 
>are probably more detailed articulations of the
>principle of  relevance. They are, say, didactic renderings of the
>principle of  relevance. 
 
Well, love your 'didactic'. "Deictic" if you must! But there's more to it  
than that. S&W are clear that they are using 'principle' in _a different  
*usage* (I won't say 'sense'). And note that Grice somehow avoids 'relevance'  
and speaks 'relation' rather, honouring not just Kant, but Aristotle (the 
third  category: 'poiotes', posotes, and the other two. Kant: qualitaet 
quantitaet  relatio modus -- Latin qualitas quantitas relatio modus. Chapman is 
charming in  her account of 'relatio' in Aristotle's _Categories_: such an 
_abstract_ notion! 
 
Capone:
 
>Also, they are culturally embedded maxims - see 
 
[or read the articles and books by]
>Sperber on the relationship between social 
>practices and the principle of
>relevance.
Yes. And while  in France, let's have a cheer for the (now difunct, but who 
cares) GRICE: 
 
        Groupe pour la recherche de la  comprehension elementaire
 
! -- co-founded by the Italian toponymic Recanati!)
 
Capone:
>This could be the topic for a dissertation or for a 
>paper. 
 
or a tea party at the swimming-pool library.
 
>One shoud think
>seriously of this. 
 
But never lose your sense of humour. As Grice says, "Laughter _in_  
philosophy is not laughter _at_ philosophy". 
 
>I have not thought in depth about this.
>All I know is that I am  able  to move logically from the principle of
>Relevance to the  Gricean maxims and from the gricean maxims to the
>principle of  relevance.
Well, you make it sound like a game of chess. Imagine if someone (a  
philosphy professor) were to say:
 
    "I am able to move from Locke's empiricism
     to Kant's rationalism and Schopenhauer's
     pessimism and then from Heidegger's
     existentialism to Derrida's  deconstructionalism"
 
I would wonder if the man has a _home_ (always moving!) :)
 
Capone:
 
>If the maxims spread as part of our cultural heritage, neogriceans are  not
>wrong in their enterprises.
Good. You are taking up Mrs. Jack's offensive, "The rights and wrongs of  
Grice". Who did she think she _was_? I hope someone kept that paper, because 
a  serious student (I myself was slightly disappointed) will have to 
consider it to  swallow Grice's sentence-by-sentence commentary on the essay that 
who knows how  it reached Grice. Of all the zillions of papers (published and 
all), he has, to  tease us all, spend like a whole _strand_ discussing the 
views in some  'unpublished' paper that we cannot really _judge_ unless we 
read? Anyway, there  are worse things in life.
Capone:
>But this is just one voice, in the debate.
Well, yes. There's the neogriceans, the paleogriceans, the griceans, the  
postgriceans, the pregriceans -- and, if I may substantivise, Grice.
 
An excellent further Italianate thing here is Sbisa's "Legacy of Grice".  
She titled it "Grice's Heritage". But that to me is slightly confusing in 
that  there is another Grice people hardly mention: G. R. Grice, of UEA/Norwich 
(I was  once doing a Philosopher's Index search and came across things like 
"A  discussion of Grice's theory of the pact". I added to the list -- only 
to later  realise, if you excuse me the split infinitive, it was, er, the 
_wrong_  Grice.
 
 
Cheers,
 
J. L. Speranza
   The Swimming-Pool Library
          (for the Grice  Club)
 
**************Recession-proof vacation ideas.  Find free things to do in 
the U.S. 
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav00000002)