[I]f we say that I only get at the symptoms of his anger, that carries an important implication. But is this the way we do talk? --Austin, Papers 107.
About this quote
- What does it mean?
- Describing anger through symptoms implies a different way of knowing.
- In plain terms
- Seeing anger signs changes how we know it.
- What can you take from it?
- Inference changes direct knowledge.
Where it applies
Putting it to work
Questions to consider
- How do you know others are angry?
- Is observation enough?
Another view
We do talk this way about internal states.
More from J. L. Austin
Ordinary language blinkers the already feeble imagination. --Austin, Papers 68.
Permalink to quote #7 But suppose we take the noun 'truth': here is a case where the disagreements between different theorists have largely turned on whether they interpreted this a…
Permalink to quote #9 Faced with the nonsense question 'What is the meaning of a word?' and perhaps dimly recognizing it to be nonsense, we are nevertheless not inclined to give it …
Permalink to quote #6
Related quotes
His rage had sent him into Latin: he would have spouted Chinese or Greenlandic had he been able to, for he was in the throes of one of those crises in which th…
Gustave FlaubertGustave Flaubert quote #71 You have never, I think, known real Grief-panic, melancholia, madness, night-sweats, we've all known for most of our lives-you and me particularly. I'm not sur…
Diana CooperDiana Cooper quote #1 My major hobby is teasing people who take themselves and the quality of their knowledge too seriously and those who don't have the guts to sometimes say: I don…
Nassim Nicholas TalebNassim Nicholas Taleb quote #1