< Return to Video

Lecture 5 - What Are Arguments Made Of - Language

  • 0:00 - 0:05
    Last time, we discussed what arguments are
  • 0:05 - 0:09
    for, their purposes.
    We saw that arguments have at least three
  • 0:09 - 0:12
    purposes,
    namely, persuasion, justification, and
  • 0:12 - 0:15
    explanation.
    We also saw that one way to explain
  • 0:15 - 0:20
    something is to cite its purpose.
    So, we can understand why Joe went to the
  • 0:20 - 0:25
    store by seeing that he went to the store
    because he wanted some milk.
  • 0:25 - 0:30
    So his purpose was to get milk.
    Similarly, we can understand arguments by
  • 0:30 - 0:33
    looking at their purposes, and that's what
    we did last time.
  • 0:33 - 0:37
    But this time,
    we're looking at a different kind of
  • 0:37 - 0:40
    explanation.
    And as we saw, one way to explain things
  • 0:40 - 0:44
    is to look at the material.
    So you want to understand why a MacBook
  • 0:44 - 0:47
    Air is so light, the answer is, it's made
    out of aluminum.
  • 0:47 - 0:52
    Similarly, if we want to understand
    arguments, we're going to gain understanding
  • 0:52 - 0:56
    by looking carefully at the material that
    they're made out of.
  • 0:56 - 1:01
    And we saw that arguments are sets of
    sentences, statements, and propositions.
  • 1:01 - 1:04
    So that means they're made out of
    language.
  • 1:04 - 1:09
    So, in this lecture, and the next few,
    we're going to look at the nature of
  • 1:09 - 1:12
    language in order to better understand
    arguments.
  • 1:12 - 1:17
    So, if we know that arguments are made out
    of language, we know that the only
  • 1:17 - 1:22
    creatures who can give arguments are ones
    that can use language.
  • 1:22 - 1:27
    Now some people think that other animals
    can use language, and there's a minimum
  • 1:27 - 1:30
    kind of language that other animals can
    use.
  • 1:30 - 1:35
    But other animals cannot use language
    that's complex enough to make argument
  • 1:35 - 1:38
    with.
    It might seem that there's some
  • 1:38 - 1:40
    exceptions.
    Here's one possibility.
  • 1:40 - 1:50
    But no matter what it sounds
  • 1:50 - 1:55
    like, this goat is not really arguing.
    Maybe he's fighting, maybe he's fending
  • 1:55 - 1:59
    off what he takes to be an enemy, but he's
    not arguing.
  • 1:59 - 2:04
    So, if other animals can use language, we
    can't define humans as the animal that
  • 2:04 - 2:08
    talks.
    But we can define humans as the animal
  • 2:08 - 2:11
    that argues,
    or as Aristotle said, the rational animal,
  • 2:11 - 2:15
    the animal that reasons, because other
    animals don't do that.
  • 2:15 - 2:20
    Humans are the only one that argues and
    reasons in this sense.
  • 2:20 - 2:22
    So,
    we can understand humans and arguments
  • 2:22 - 2:28
    better if we understand language better.
    Now I can't tell you everything that needs
  • 2:28 - 2:32
    to be said about language.
    You'd need to take a linguistics course
  • 2:32 - 2:35
    for that.
    And I recommend that you try one,
  • 2:35 - 2:39
    because it's very interesting.
    But here I'm only going to be able to make
  • 2:39 - 2:44
    four basic points about language.
    First of all, language is important.
  • 2:44 - 2:47
    Second, it's conventional.
    Third, it's representational.
  • 2:47 - 2:51
    And fourth, it's social.
    That should at least get us going in
  • 2:51 - 2:55
    understanding what arguments are made of.
    First, language is important.
  • 2:56 - 3:00
    It would be extremely difficult to live
    life without language.
  • 3:00 - 3:06
    Just try to imagine what it would be like.
    It's really hard to imagine.
  • 3:06 - 3:12
    But think about someone like Helen Keller,
    who was born able to see and hear, but
  • 3:12 - 3:16
    very shortly thereafter lost her ability
    to see and hear.
  • 3:16 - 3:22
    It was only much later in life that she
    gained the ability to use language,
  • 3:22 - 3:26
    because she never had that in her early
    years.
  • 3:26 - 3:30
    And when she gained that ability, she was
    amazed.
  • 3:30 - 3:35
    W, a, t, e, r, water.
    It has a name.
  • 3:35 - 3:35
    W, a, t.
  • 3:37 - 3:47
    When Helen Keller gained the ability to
    use language and to communicate, she
  • 3:47 - 3:52
    didn't become able to see or hear.
    She still couldn't see or hear, but she
  • 3:52 - 3:56
    could do amazing things.
    She went around the country giving
  • 3:56 - 3:59
    presentations.
    She graduated from Radcliffe College.
  • 3:59 - 4:04
    All of that was made available to her,
    simply by adding language and
  • 4:04 - 4:08
    communication to her life.
    So language is extremely useful, and that
  • 4:08 - 4:12
    explains why it's all around us.
    Just imagine walking down the streets of
  • 4:12 - 4:17
    the city and all the signs that you'd see.
    You just see words here, there and
  • 4:17 - 4:20
    everywhere.
    And now we have a mystery.
  • 4:20 - 4:25
    If we're not paying attention to language,
    then how can we use it so well to achieve
  • 4:25 - 4:29
    so many purposes?
    The answer to that lies in the second
  • 4:29 - 4:34
    general feature of language that I want to
    talk about, namely, language is
  • 4:34 - 4:36
    conventional.
    But what's a convention?
  • 4:36 - 4:42
    Remember that in the United States people
    drive on the right-hand side of the road.
  • 4:42 - 4:45
    That's our convention.
    But what does that mean?
  • 4:45 - 4:50
    It means that there's a general pattern of
    behavior that most people throughout
  • 4:50 - 4:55
    society obey on a regular basis, and they
    criticize people who deviate from that
  • 4:55 - 4:57
    pattern.
    And the same applies to language.
  • 4:57 - 5:03
    We have certain patterns of using words in
    certain ways, and when people deviate from
  • 5:03 - 5:07
    those patterns we criticize them.
    We say they're misspeaking or it's
  • 5:07 - 5:09
    ungrammatical.
    Of course, conventions can vary.
  • 5:09 - 5:13
    Everybody knows that there are many
    countries around the world where people
  • 5:13 - 5:18
    don't drive on the right-hand side of the
    road, they drive on the left-hand side of
  • 5:18 - 5:20
    the road.
    United Kingdom's one of them, but there
  • 5:20 - 5:23
    are lots more.
    And the same applies to language.
  • 5:23 - 5:28
    You can have the same word that's used to
    mean very different things in different
  • 5:28 - 5:30
    languages.
    Most notorious example is football.
  • 5:30 - 5:36
    In the United States it's used to refer to
    American Football whereas in the rest of
  • 5:36 - 5:40
    the world it's used to refer to what
    Americans call soccer.
  • 5:40 - 5:45
    And people in the rest of the world think
    that America is kind of silly because you
  • 5:45 - 5:50
    don't use your feet on the ball except for
    punting and placekicking in football.
  • 5:50 - 5:56
    But whether it makes sense or not the
    point here is simply that the conventions
  • 5:56 - 5:59
    can vary from one part of the world to the
    other.
  • 5:59 - 6:02
    And of course, you can do that with any
    word.
  • 6:02 - 6:07
    You could, in English, use the word, money
    to refer to socks. At least the English
  • 6:07 - 6:10
    language could've done that.
    It could've done that.
  • 6:10 - 6:15
    It didn't, but it could've.
    So, in this way, conventions seem to be
  • 6:15 - 6:18
    kind of arbitrary.
    They could've been very different.
  • 6:18 - 6:23
    But language is far from completely
    arbitrary, because the conventions of
  • 6:23 - 6:27
    language have limits, and two of these
    limits that I want to emphasize come from
  • 6:27 - 6:31
    the fact that language is also
    representational and social.
  • 6:31 - 6:36
    So first language is representational.
    When we use language, we're often trying
  • 6:36 - 6:40
    to refer to objects in the world, and
    describe facts in the world.
  • 6:40 - 6:45
    And you can't change those objects or
    those facts merely by changing your
  • 6:45 - 6:49
    language.
    One good story to illustrate this is about
  • 6:49 - 6:53
    the young Lincoln.
    When he was a lawyer, he supposedly
  • 6:53 - 6:56
    examined a witness during a trial, and he
    said,
  • 6:56 - 7:01
    Okay, how many legs does a horse have?
    And the witness said, Four.
  • 7:01 - 7:05
    And then Lincoln said, Well,
    if we call a tail a leg, then how many
  • 7:05 - 7:09
    legs does a horse have?
    And the witness said, Well,
  • 7:09 - 7:12
    then I suppose the horse would have five
    legs.
  • 7:12 - 7:15
    And Lincoln said, Absolutely not.
    That's wrong.
  • 7:15 - 7:18
    Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a
    leg.
  • 7:18 - 7:24
    And the point of this story, whether it's
    true historically or not, is that language
  • 7:24 - 7:30
    cannot change the facts of the world.
    It can't make horses have five legs, if
  • 7:30 - 7:34
    you merely change your language.
    Here's another example.
  • 7:34 - 7:40
    Suppose that you don't have much money,
    But you happen to have a lot of socks in
  • 7:40 - 7:44
    your drawer.
    Well, you could say, I'm going to use the
  • 7:44 - 7:49
    word money to refer to socks.
    And now all of a sudden I've got lots of
  • 7:49 - 7:51
    money.
    I'm not poor anymore.
  • 7:51 - 7:55
    It ain't going to work,
    and that's because language, again, can't
  • 7:55 - 8:01
    change your financial situation
    because that's a fact about the world,
  • 8:01 - 8:05
    not about how you're using the word socks
    or the word money.
  • 8:05 - 8:11
    And the other limit on the conventions of
    language comes from the fact that language
  • 8:11 - 8:15
    is social.
    Sure, sometimes we talk to ourselves and
  • 8:15 - 8:20
    use language to write things down, write
    notes to ourselves, for example, without
  • 8:20 - 8:26
    other people around but basically language
    evolved because of its social function.
  • 8:26 - 8:31
    What that means is that there's a point in
    following the conventions of the language
  • 8:31 - 8:36
    as shared by the rest of that society that
    speaks that language.
  • 8:36 - 8:41
    I've always thought that it was
    kind of silly that grapefruits are called
  • 8:41 - 8:44
    grapefruits.
    Sure, they're fruits, but they don't look
  • 8:44 - 8:47
    like grapes at all.
    They look more like lemons.
  • 8:47 - 8:53
    They're like really big lemons, and
    that's why I think they ought to be called
  • 8:53 - 8:57
    mega lemons.
    But If I went to a restaurant, and I
  • 8:57 - 9:02
    wanted to order grapefruit juice, so I
    turned to the service person and
  • 9:02 - 9:07
    said, I'd like some mega lemon juice, I
    probably wouldn't get what I wanted.
  • 9:07 - 9:12
    And so even if I think the language is not
    using the right conventions, there's a
  • 9:12 - 9:17
    point in following the conventions of the
    language in order to be able to
  • 9:17 - 9:20
    communicate with other people and get what
    I want.
  • 9:20 - 9:25
    And again, the great philosophers Monty
    Python saw this very well, when they
  • 9:25 - 9:30
    produced their little clip called, The Man
    Who Speaks Only In Anagrams.
  • 9:30 - 9:36
    Our first guest into the studio tonight is
    a man who talks entirely in anagrams.
  • 9:36 - 9:39
    Patsee Greot.
    Do you enjoy this?
  • 9:39 - 9:43
    I dom certainlyodd revychumso.
    What's your name?
  • 9:43 - 9:47
    Hamrack, Hamrack Yeterot.
    So the point is obvious.
  • 9:47 - 9:53
    Language is shared and once it's shared
    then it make sense to actually follow the
  • 9:53 - 9:57
    conventions of society even if you don't
    like them.
  • 9:57 - 10:03
    Overall then, language is important, and
    it's conventional in ways that might seem
  • 10:03 - 10:07
    arbitrary,
    but actually, is limited in important ways
  • 10:07 - 10:12
    by the fact that language is also
    representational and social.
  • 10:12 - 10:15
    But it's kind of cheap to say language is
    conventional.
  • 10:15 - 10:19
    Which are the conventions?
    Which are the rules that language follows?
  • 10:19 - 10:23
    And this is actually extremely complex,
    because language follows rules or
  • 10:23 - 10:28
    conventions at many different levels.
    Just take a real simple example.
  • 10:28 - 10:31
    You walk into a pizza shop and you say,
    Gimme pepperoni.
  • 10:31 - 10:34
    Well, the person then fixes a pepperoni
    pizza.
  • 10:35 - 10:38
    And you pay for it.
    But how did that work?
  • 10:38 - 10:43
    That you said, Gimme pepperoni.
    Well, first of all notice, that you had to
  • 10:43 - 10:48
    use words that were meaningful to the
    person you were speaking to.
  • 10:48 - 10:51
    Gimme wasn't a word in English, a long
    time ago,
  • 10:51 - 10:57
    but this person understands gimme as a
    word, and therefore they can understand
  • 10:57 - 10:59
    it.
    But in addition to those semantic
  • 10:59 - 11:03
    constraints, you also have to have
    physical production constraints.
  • 11:03 - 11:08
    You have to say it loud enough.
    If the pizza shop is really noisy, then
  • 11:08 - 11:14
    you have to speak pretty loudly to get the
    person behind the counter, to understand
  • 11:14 - 11:17
    what you're saying.
    You also have to put the words in the
  • 11:17 - 11:21
    right order.
    If, instead of saying, gimme a pepperoni
  • 11:21 - 11:24
    pizza, you said,
    Pizza a gimme pepperoni,
  • 11:24 - 11:27
    they might not understand at all what
    you're saying.
  • 11:27 - 11:31
    So there are structural combination rules
    that you have to follow as well.
  • 11:31 - 11:36
    And there are also etiquette rules. In
    some pizza places if you just said,
  • 11:36 - 11:39
    Gimme pepperoni, the waiter might say,
    Well, forget it, sir.
  • 11:39 - 11:42
    I don't serve such impolite
    people.
  • 11:42 - 11:46
    I certainly would say that to my son if my
    son said, Gimme pepperoni.
  • 11:46 - 11:50
    I wouldn't get him a piece.
    I'd say, you need to ask me properly.
  • 11:50 - 11:55
    So rules of etiquette can also get in the
    way of communication and cooperation.
  • 11:55 - 11:58
    So language operates at all of these
    levels.
  • 11:58 - 12:03
    Physical production, semantics, or the
    meanings of words, syntax, or the rules of
  • 12:03 - 12:08
    grammar, and etiquette.
    Now all of this might seem obvious to you.
  • 12:08 - 12:14
    And it probably should be obvious to you.
    But the rules of language are not always
  • 12:14 - 12:18
    obvious.
    And that's what we're going to be learning
  • 12:18 - 12:22
    throughout this course.
    I'll start with a simple example.
  • 12:22 - 12:25
    What's this?
    Well, that is a finger.
  • 12:25 - 12:27
    Okay.
    But what's this?
  • 12:27 - 12:28
    Aaaah.
    That is a singer.
  • 12:28 - 12:32
    This is not a finger.
    That's not a singer.
  • 12:32 - 12:39
    Why do we pronounce the word finger with a
    hard G and the word singer with a soft G?
  • 12:39 - 12:47
    That's a rule that we all follow, but very
    few people know the rule behind that
  • 12:47 - 12:50
    pronunciation.
    So, do you know the rule?
  • 12:50 - 12:58
    Take a little while and think about it.
    .
  • 13:08 - 13:12
    Have you got it yet?
    Okay, I'll tell you the answer.
  • 13:12 - 13:18
    When a word ends in N, G, E, R, and it's
    derived from a verb that ends in NG, then
  • 13:18 - 13:23
    you get a soft G, like singer.
    But when the word that ends in N, G, E, R,
  • 13:23 - 13:29
    is not derived from a verb that ends in
    NG, then you get either a hard G, like
  • 13:29 - 13:32
    finger,
    Or a kind of medium G like plunger or
  • 13:32 - 13:36
    danger.
    Now when you get that medium G or that
  • 13:36 - 13:41
    hard G that's a trickier question.
    And I don't know the answer to that one,
  • 13:41 - 13:45
    which shows that we can all use language
    according to rules, without knowing what
  • 13:45 - 13:49
    the rules are.
    We don't have to be conscious of the rules
  • 13:49 - 13:51
    at all.
    And a lot of what we're going to be doing
  • 13:51 - 13:56
    in this course is looking behind our
    language to try to figure out the rules
  • 13:56 - 14:00
    that govern the way we use language,
    especially when we're making arguments in
  • 14:00 - 14:03
    order to better understand what we're
    doing.
  • 14:03 - 14:07
    Some of the answers we give will be
    obvious once you mention them.
  • 14:07 - 14:10
    But, I bet you hadn't thought of him
    before.
Title:
Lecture 5 - What Are Arguments Made Of - Language
Video Language:
English

English subtitles

Revisions