Can linguists identify un/meaning of life by deploying formal pragmato-semantics?
Dedicated to the author of the book, Man's Search for Meaning
When I, keeping in mind the consequences of anthropogenic global heating, was heading towards a non-manipulative dialogue-based money-signifier-less, party-less horizontally (dis)organized democratic humane kowm without any materialistic utilitarian goal,
I have faced the hegemonic domination of Army/ Military/ Paratroopers’ Linguistics, Airborne Linguistics, Cryptolinguistics/Cryptologic(al) Linguistics (much sale-brated “endangered language enterprise” and Corpus Linguistics supply database for encoding and decoding crypto!) in the arena of institutionalized funded organized academiocracy. All of them, through their disciplinary technologies, are contributing to the death industry, i.e., simulated wars among neighbors.
I also observed that some leisure class members of the linguist tribe are engaged themselves in fragmenting language-object by deploying presupposed closed models (as if models in the ramp, suffering from anorexia nervosa or bulimia) and categoremes, i,e., anatomo-bio-political tools for penetrating docile bodies of the subjects. What a case of redundancy!
If I, ethico-politically speaking, do not wish to be a cog in such disciplinary machinery,
(a) may I be branded as a person with legal conflict for manufacturing such hoax?
(b) may ‘we’ abandon such violent enterprises?
(c) Instead, on the basis of priority, may I prepare myself to perform socially necessary labor (from which I was forced to be alienated by obeying degree-disease) in the midst of dissolution?
(d) or may we accept or conform all these processes of subjection, subjectification, and objectification?
Now, being hurt by the high decibel cacophony, a case of non-affordance (contrary to the affordance as proposed by the environmental psychologists), I am taking my recourse to non-conventional speech pathology through the indigenous theory of corporeal, i.e., epimeleia heautou!
It is matter of regret that I could not find Gandhi and Tagore in the list of topics. In fact these two proper (sur)names are too relevant for the better engagement with this particular question.
Yes, by the philosophy of thought which is based mainly on the language that is the tool of common sense.
To a certain extent they can, because the meanings of pragmatism are inherent in man.
When I, as a part of institutionalized funded organized academiocracy, was surveying bauls of Bengal, I was asked by a faqir, "What type of linguist are you? Can't you establish dialogue? Can't you constitute polylogue? Can't you participate in conversation without your manipulative tools?"
With utter bewilderment, I found that so far I had treated language as mere object, something outside me and I had blooded it by using violent tools of fragmentation on it with a view to surveil. However, later on, after spending much time with the faqir, I realized that my body is my language (yes, apart from baul-faqir tradition, I found such realization in Sartre's Being and Nothingness)-- it is not fully outside of me-- it is simultaneously embodied and disembodied-- inside out and outside in!
To solve the question of of sufferings, I took my refuge to my corporeal existence after giving up institutionalized academiocracy! Technical Report ARCHITECTURE OF/AND BODY: CORPOREAL STUDIES
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Atmospheric Sciences
- Climate Science
- Climate Change