Philosophical Enquiries
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing Philosophical Enquiries by Subject "Austin, John L."
Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access 'In My Mind's Ear': Misconstruing Sounds as Sights – a Philosophical and Cinematical Caution(1999) Cameron, Evan Wm.The notion of 'imaging' music ought to perplex us philosophically, for 'to imagine' is a verb of visualisation. Hearing musical events may cause us to imagine things, and seeing things may cause us to think of hearing musical events, but to speak of visualising how we hear when hearing musically is to echo an innervating confusion. The primary space within which we encounter things is auditory/tactile rather than visual. To think accurately of music, and especially so when composing it, one must retrain oneself to think of it non-visually, avoiding the commonplace 'imaginings' of the formalisations of mathematical structures, for example, that so often reduce what we hear thereafter to mere exemplifications of them lacking any hope of musical fascination.Item Open Access KING KONG, Carroll and Currie: Misconstruing Monstrously How We See Things by Means of Movies(1998) Cameron, Evan Wm.Two confusions have vitiated recent philosophical discussions about filmmaking: the presumption of Nöel Carroll that discrimination entails essentialism and the presumption of both Carroll and Gregory Currie that we cannot be seeing what we commonly speak of seeing when seeing 'fictional things' things by means of movies, monsters like King Kong in particular, for our responses differ from what they would have been had we been in the presence of the things that we are encountering. Fortunately, neither of the confusions need bother us nor need we persist with the authors in misdescribing how we encounter things seen by means of movies.Item Open Access McLuhan's Method: the Mad Hatter at Tea with Austin and Wittgenstein(1989) Cameron, Evan Wm.What was McLuhan doing? How was he doing it? Was it important? Within this essay I try to answer those questions by linking what he said and did, and how he did it, with the ways and means of the seemingly dissimilar philosophical project of Austin and Wittgenstein.