pynchon agnostic? II

[jbor]

on 10/3/03 11:58 PM, thomas kyhn rovsing hjoernet at tkrh at worldonline.dk
wrote:

>>>>> whatever is outside of language is not in itself divided into distinct
>>>>> entities. 
> 
> What I mean is that what is outside of language (if anything, etc.) is not
> in itself already divided into distinct entities that language in its turn
> supplies with names. Divisions seem to be introduced with language, as is
> indicated by the fact that different languages make different divisions.
> This is not to say that there is no difference outside of language. However,
> 'difference' is a concept introduced with language.
> 
>> And yet you now agree that you and I are separate beings.
> 
> Don't know about that last word.

It is absolutely synonymous with your "entities". You accept that we are
separate beings/"distinct entities" and yet you are still trying to maintain
that this is only a linguistic construct.

> This is not to say that there is no difference outside of language. However,
> 'difference' is a concept introduced with language.

If there is difference outside of language then the second statement is
demonstrably false. Since there is difference outside of language (you and I
are separate beings), your argument falls apart. Check mate.

best