are u sure u understand McLuhan here? isnt it less suspension and more does not compute. hes brushing up against the limits of speech like Wittgenstein or davidson talk about. its nonsense to condemn your house as evil, when u cant get perspective on it. you can talk about this or that piece of furniture needing to go. but to condemn the…
are u sure u understand McLuhan here? isnt it less suspension and more does not compute. hes brushing up against the limits of speech like Wittgenstein or davidson talk about. its nonsense to condemn your house as evil, when u cant get perspective on it. you can talk about this or that piece of furniture needing to go. but to condemn the whole is non-sense. it cannot be meaningfully spoken. its this sort of thing wittgenstein hones in on in "on certainty"
are u sure u understand McLuhan here? isnt it less suspension and more does not compute. hes brushing up against the limits of speech like Wittgenstein or davidson talk about. its nonsense to condemn your house as evil, when u cant get perspective on it. you can talk about this or that piece of furniture needing to go. but to condemn the whole is non-sense. it cannot be meaningfully spoken. its this sort of thing wittgenstein hones in on in "on certainty"
loved the debate reference, great post!