Say what you want about "this coach." He probably doesn't exist anymore.
I've been diligently plugging away at these thought experiments for over two years now, and I've promised to work through each and every one of the 100 that are in Julian Baggini's book. That's led me to a lot of important discoveries about the history of philosophy, but occasionally it leads to a clunker. Even Baggini closed his thoughts on this week's experiment by saying:
The puzzle cannot, of course, be resolved here. One thing is clear, however. If you find these problems trivial rather than engrossing, don't study logic or the philosophy of language.
Uh oh. Let's see what it is I have to discuss.
--------------------------------------------------
"Your honour, my client's defence is very simple. He accepts that he did indeed write in his newspaper column that "the current manager of the England football team is a liar, an idiot, and a national disgrace." He also accepts going on to say that he "should be shot." But by doing so, he in no way libelled the plaintiff, Mr Glenn Robson-Keganson.
"The reason for this is easy to see. At the time the article was written and published, there was no such person as the England football team manager. Mr Robson-Keganson had tendered his resignation two days earlier, and his offer had been accepted. This news became public knowledge on the day the defendant's article was published.
"The plaintiff claims that the accusations my client made were false. But they were neither true nor false, since they were not about anyone. Indeed, it would be more accurate to say they were meaningless. "Flar-Flar is a racehorse" is true if Flar-Flar is a racehorse, false if she is not, and meaningless if there is no such beast.
"The jury should therefore dismiss the case. It is just nonsense to suggest one can libel someone who does not exist. I rest my case."
Source: "On Denoting" by Bertrand Russell (1905).
Baggini, J., The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten, 2005, p. 253.
---------------------------------------------------
What do you think? True, false, or meaningless? What does it all mean and why does that matter? There's a little more to it than just this one libel case so I'll be back on Friday to dissect it all. We're in the home stretch now so I hope you'll stick with me to the end.
The puzzle cannot, of course, be resolved here. One thing is clear, however. If you find these problems trivial rather than engrossing, don't study logic or the philosophy of language.
Uh oh. Let's see what it is I have to discuss.
--------------------------------------------------
"Your honour, my client's defence is very simple. He accepts that he did indeed write in his newspaper column that "the current manager of the England football team is a liar, an idiot, and a national disgrace." He also accepts going on to say that he "should be shot." But by doing so, he in no way libelled the plaintiff, Mr Glenn Robson-Keganson.
"The reason for this is easy to see. At the time the article was written and published, there was no such person as the England football team manager. Mr Robson-Keganson had tendered his resignation two days earlier, and his offer had been accepted. This news became public knowledge on the day the defendant's article was published.
"The plaintiff claims that the accusations my client made were false. But they were neither true nor false, since they were not about anyone. Indeed, it would be more accurate to say they were meaningless. "Flar-Flar is a racehorse" is true if Flar-Flar is a racehorse, false if she is not, and meaningless if there is no such beast.
"The jury should therefore dismiss the case. It is just nonsense to suggest one can libel someone who does not exist. I rest my case."
Source: "On Denoting" by Bertrand Russell (1905).
Baggini, J., The Pig That Wants to Be Eaten, 2005, p. 253.
---------------------------------------------------
What do you think? True, false, or meaningless? What does it all mean and why does that matter? There's a little more to it than just this one libel case so I'll be back on Friday to dissect it all. We're in the home stretch now so I hope you'll stick with me to the end.
