Besides, what are you so mad about? It's not like you weren't going to destroy yourselves in the next hundreds years or so anyway.
"What is theoretical basis for not wanting to destroy the planet? Come on guys, just...can we not?"
"Yeah, but probably only like...sheep and followers are good at the jobs, when you think about it..."
Marx: "you can take our lives, but you can never take our surplus labor value!"
John Locke gave us one of the first modern theories of language, well before philosophy of language really took off. He more or less described language as a representation of the ideas of the speaker, rather than referring to external objects in the world. So if someone talks about a tree, the word "tree" doesn't strictly refer to a concrete object that exists, but only represents the idea of a tree in the mind of a person attempting to communicate. According to this view, mistakes in understanding language are mistakes in correctly interpreting the intent or ideas of the speaker.
Later theorists of language, like Roland Barthes, who is most famous for his ideas about the "death of the author", viewed language as a much more public enterprise. Once a given speech act occurs, or especially a given text, it is open to interpretation and re-interpretation by the public. The original intentions or ideas of the author aren't necessarily more valid than those of any other interpreter.
Later theorists of language, like Roland Barthes, who is most famous for his ideas about the "death of the author", viewed language as a much more public enterprise. Once a given speech act occurs, or especially a given text, it is open to interpretation and re-interpretation by the public. The original intentions or ideas of the author aren't necessarily more valid than those of any other interpreter.