Re: Positivism

On Sat, 23 Apr 1994, George Aichele wrote:

> Thanks to James Sennett & Philip Graber for helpful posts on
> logical positivism. The "descendents" of the positivists (eg,
> Quine et al., & less directly the semiologists) are still quite
> important, although as Graber notes the view of language is now
> considerably less simplistic. I'd like to add that the notion of
> translation has also become more ambiguous, & this is part of the
> problem I have with Louw & Nida's LEXICON, which is, I think,
> much influenced by their views on "dynamic equivalence." On the
> other hand, the electronic version of LN is *very* handy -- I
> wish there was something like it for LSJ.

You're welcome.  But now I'm a bit confused -- and maybe in a way that 
can turn this thread back to Greek issues (or at least translation 
issues, which I trust would be more in keeping with the board!).  Are you 
suggesting that there the dynamic equivalence theory in translation is in 
the heritage of positivism?  I would have expected exactly the opposite.  
The whole idea is that there is not the kind of one-to-one correspondence 
between form and meaning that Russell, Whitehead, and the early 
Wittgenstein were in search of.  Could you explain your comments a little 
more fully?

"Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana."
--Groucho Marx

Prof. James F. Sennett
Asst. Professor of Philosophy         sennett@goliath.pbac.edu
Palm Beach Atlantic College                    andretg@aol.com
PO Box 24708                             voice: (407) 835-4431
West Palm Beach, FL  33416-4708            fax: (407) 835-4342