From: jim <jmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 11:24:49 +0100
In message <000701bda800$11890260$33dc0d81@capurro-1>,
Prof. Dr. Rafael Capurro <capurro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes
>jim, there is a project in France to publish (probably next year) a
>Dictionnaire des intraduisibles (!), the French word: _intraduisibles_ is
>very difficult to translate into German...
>Von: jim <jmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Datum: Sonntag, 5. Juli 1998 03:09
>Betreff: Troubles Troubles Troubles ...
>a better question might be what would count as evidence that
>>an idea is not translatable? Alternatively, does the position involve a
>>commitment to relativity? And can we really make sense of the idea of
>>relativity, such as, eg, found in Whorf?
Rafael, as I am sure you well know, the allusion is to Donald Davidson's
argument in "On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme," in which he
entitles the assumption that there are such schemes the "third dogma of
empiricism," the first two being the assumptions (1) that a reductionism
to a purely phenomenalistic basis is 'possible', and (2) that there is an
Analytic/Synthetic distinction; both of which Quine forcefully snuffed
My point is that these problems are immediately related to the issue at
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---