Page 72 - Studio International - December 1973

ART THEORY& PRACTICE
studies or intensive and extensive features microstructural, but de facto it's not to do with generalizing of the membership situation. What
of discourse. In a way we deal with the having Weltanschauungen consisting of about the Apostel list involving functions
question, 'what does the "gross" view imply ?' microstructures of grammar and related logical derived in relation to the groups you consider
Again, we don't see that the location of features (selection restrictions and whatever) you belong to, plus generalized deontologies,
minutiae necessarily excludes the possibility of which represent sets whose closure may well be plus other logics ? One wonders whether it (the
the macro-structure. It may be the only way teleologically determined. Alternatively, where problem) doesn't fundamentally relate to the
macro-structural items are caught in the models appear satisfaction may be teleological. deliberative problem, e.g. involving 'what we
discourse, the only modes whereby the situation The analytical method is to do with the ought to do'. There is an extensive permutative
can be recursive. There's the lack of importance teleological facts, inasmuch as the atomic types possibility in the Apostel list(s) which, ad hoc,
in the distinction between the macro and micro- taken produce a number of operations which is dealt with deliberatively by (or, again perhaps,
structures inasmuch as the macro-structure may reflect teleology back. It's not simply a matter of the picture seems to be de facto) one which
have a one-to-one correlation with the micro- ideology revision, but the teleological priority readily accommodates a psychological
structures. Back to the problem of nature .. . is to obtain ideology; it must come first. No one dimension. Meaninglessness might be
Consider the analogy of measurement as a knows how to obtain it in advance with any established merely on 'frequency of response',
matter of grammars, as a matter of answering degree of structural sophistication. Ideology is etc., etc., chain strengths, in terms of possible
some of the questions raised at the previous equivalent to 'nature' identified with generalization, etc. (Amongst what ?) Consider a
meeting, e.g. a question of 'truth' instead of quantification, however problematic ontology situation so instrumentally formalized, an
`grammar'. What we've got is a puzzle - no may appear in relation to ideology. There is the induction, or quasi-induction. Would it be
puzzle with respect to the Annotation/ problem of induction as a reflexive interesting to consider indexing it with respect
conversation device inasmuch as it was/may be interactiveness between minimally structural to inductiveness, a rational 'going on' ? A fairly
something which contains its own analytical items/discourse, whether we talk about macro or minimal metaphysical presupposition has to be
armoury. It was mooted with a very much lower micro. Presumably these characterizations are caught. It's probably how reference classes are
profile set of psychological presently considered highly relativistic anyway, because if you're established (approximately induction, plus its
device-danglers than this appears to have. involved in a pseudo-structural situation there indices, or ontological correlates). How much
You've got this puzzle of what you select, but may be a symmetry of arbitrariness with respect might be shown ? We may be willing to construct
isn't the lexical situation position a question of to apparent scalar distinctions. (Is that a situation of that kind. It may partly just be a
not having selected, of making a (the) guess that relativism ?) The macro/micro is dependent on, paired-association system, and then it's a matter
these minutiae/surfaces are out of existence ? If and will emerge as, a consequence of your of wringing what you can out of it.
the set up is capable of dealing with some operations, e.g. when you've got complex (i.e. OK, we're going on in a form. Let's consider
grammatical problems, there ale ways of dealing/ pathway) trees, that you will find yourself that there is/may be some gross relation between
developing instruments for dealing with the dealing with an approximate equivalent of a gross something that's uttered. How can that be
puzzle itself, very much 'suck it and see' with item of discourse. In a sense one is saying that inductive ? Is it so in the sense that we are
respect to the puzzle. One is in no position to the/a gross item is included in the complex learning something about the world of discourse,
pre-suppose a solution to the puzzle. It then pathways. Incompleteness has to be taken into or what ? For example, a certain induction
becomes (reflects back on) an issue of whether account. Incompleteness equals projection- indexing might catch one sort, but not another,
there can be a radical gross list. Assume a generalization indeterminacy. The elimination an ideologically selective mechanism, both
radical gross list analysis, what sort of situation of redundancy is more or less automatic. And, internally and externally. There is a plenum of
do you have ? What is the minimal condition for further, the ascent/descent from macro to global information transmission, positive
assuming a gross-analysis approach vectorial or micro may be just that. You could have an transmission of semantic information. More
scalar ? This is assuming that a non-radical hermeneutic as lexis entry and string. That is, nestings proliferate.
gross approach is to be developed anyway. there is no assertion logic available a priori.
So, we've gone through the macro/micro If we can sort out something as entailment, V.
problem. Beyond that issue there are other quid ergo est a minimal condition for having it ? If a notion of 'topic' is derivable from some sort
assumptions, and there is this question of `Radical grossness reflexive' probably represents of statistical distributive analysis of semantics,
complex linguistic/extra-linguistic control, a highly satisfiable set of sets. Katz probably. our overall notion of 'subject' may be in some
entailment. What one is dealing with is some The relations are satisfied or they are invisible. way taken as derivable from the distribution of
tool/tools for pronouncing an ideological The only condition of set membership is `x is/is `topics' throughout the set of discrete
revision presumably (microscopically), the not an annotation'. That's trivial, not discourses. What method this sort of analysis
possibilities of having ideologies. If you took commonsensical. It's not the problem. It might use - induction etc. - is problematic. We
seriously this prospect of ideological revision (it wouldn't be a rich enough universe to hold the don't just want to account for anomalies, but
involves micro-structural positions), inasmuch dialectical as it is supposed to be 'present'. also understandings and misunderstandings. If
as ideological arrangement is relative to a range Presumably the satisfaction conditions are we do have a notion of 'topic' derivable from a
of expressible ideas, the global features of the problematic. Further, to have them, or the distributional analysis of the text of a piece of
microstructure would be a bit like being able to problem of them, is problematic. There is the discourse, then it might be possible that this
take account of the indexical features of instrumental problem of catching parts of the analysis, mapped against the full framework
ideological context, the set reflexion problem. discourse, or discourse per se, or conversation. map, would give us a picture of the contextual
It's hateful to sound like Professor Quine, but The only set condition would be that a group or lacunae of the text . . . Even with induction we
it's all going to be so connected with these group member did the uttering. It's not going will still have an unstructured set of distribution
problems at some point. to be like a father-son set, but like a fatherhood patterns. Maybe we are just fussing too much;
In order to have 'existent' as it were (a condition, ancesterhood. How's it going to maybe a rough map of the area is all we require
different ideological framework branching handle the problem of whether someone is from such an analysis. It tells us not to talk
depth) being a feature of ideology, one would included among his own ancestors ? Members, about the weather when we are in the context of
have items, alternatives to simple types. and given (single) member's problems, with conversation about The Italian Job, in other
What is odd is the lack of 'human' respect to an corder' in the Annotations, would words, what we have got is a way of discovering
(pragmatics-accessible) characteristics of the just be ruled out of court by the fixation on whether one of the Gricean structures of
Annotations themselves. Presumably you can syntactical surface. conversation is being adhered to - and that's
think of the gross annotation, i.e. list/string as `Radical grossness' should consider the more or less useless. q

266