THE INFLUENCE OF A. J. AYER'S PHILOSOPHICAL VIEWS ON THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORDINARY LANGUAGE PHILOSOPHY

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2024/11-8/13

Keywords:

ordinary language philosophy, Oxford philosophy, Anglo-American philosophy of the 20th century, analytical philosophy, natural language.

Abstract

B a c k g r o u n d . The ordinary language philosophy (OLP) is a set of interconnected philosophical approaches that have been practiced by analytical philosophers, mainly in Great Britain and the USA, since the middle of the 20th century. Its discursive space is outlined by the methodological developments and ideas of L. Wittgenstein and J. Austin, as well as the works of G. Ryall, P. Strawson, R. Hare and N. Malcolm. P. Grice and D. Davidson are often included in this school, although their works are also associated with the end of the classical period of the OLP. However, modern interest in this direction indicates the prematureness of statements about its end, setting before philosophers the task of rethinking the reasons for the temporary decline of attention and rediscovering its potential for enriching the methodology of analytic philosophy.

M e t h o d s . The article used the method of historical and philosophical reconstruction to clarify the conditions for the formation of the philosophy of everyday language, general scientific methods of cognition: analysis, synthesis, generalization to clarify key ideas and concepts that influenced the formation of the method of linguistic analysis, as well as methods of systematization and comparison.

R e s u l t s . Within the framework of the work, the periodization of the OLP was clarified, in particular, the stage of the early OLP and the classical period, which falls on the 50s of the twentieth century, were determined and presented by the works of representatives of the University of Oxford G. Ryle, J. Austin and P. Strawson. Also, key differences between the philosophy of ideal language, which is represented by the views of A. J. Ayer and the OLP in the interpretation of J. Wisdom, in particular, a different interpretation of linguistic analysis, were identified.

C o n c l u s i o n s . Linguistic analysis takes on a completely different appearance in the interpretation of the OLP compared to the ideas of A. J. Ayer. The real value of linguistic analysis within the OLP, as J. Wisdom demonstrates, lies in its ability to demonstrate the amazing dexterity of ordinary language. Ordinary language allows us to express the most subtle distinctions, nuances of meaning, intentions, and goals. This realization refutes the thesis of ideal language, which suggests that ordinary language obscures reality. On the contrary, ordinary language uses provide a reference to reality with an impressive level of detail and descriptive power that no artificial language can surpass. This ability is due not only to the function of language as a tool of representation, but also to its evolutionary adaptation to a variety of practical needs.

References

Ayer, A. J. (1946). Language, truth and logic (2nd ed.). Dover.

Forsberg, N. (2016). Where's the disagreement? The significance of the ordinary in Austin and Ayer. Language & Communication, 49, 45–55.

Frege, G. (1997). The Frege Reader (M. Beaney, Ed.). Blackwell. https://dl1.cuni.cz/pluginfile.php/767005/mod_resource/content/0/Frege%20-%20Reader.pdf

Parker-Ryan, S. (2021). Linguistic analysis: Ayer and early ordinary language philosophy. In A. Tamas Tuboly (Ed.), The historical and philosophical significance of Ayer's language, truth and logic (pp. 123–149). Palgrave.

Ramsey, F. P. (1959). Philosophy. In A. J. Ayer (Ed.), Logial positivism (pp. 321–326). The Free Press.

Russell, B. (1905). On Denoting. Mind, 14(56), 479-493.

Snowdon, P. (2005). Ordinary language philosophy. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 84–87). Elsevier.

Warnock, G. J. (1969). John Langshaw Austin, a Biographical Sketch.

In K. T. Fann (Ed.), Symposium on J. L. Austin. Humanities Press.

Wisdom, J. (1937). Philosophical perplexity. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 37(1), 71–88.

Wittgenstein, L. (1961). Tractatus logico-philosophicus (D. Pears, & B. McGuinness, Trans.). Routledge.

Published

2024-12-30

How to Cite

Sobolievskyi, P. . (2024). THE INFLUENCE OF A. J. AYER’S PHILOSOPHICAL VIEWS ON THE FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORDINARY LANGUAGE PHILOSOPHY. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Philosophy, 2(11), 42-45. https://doi.org/10.17721/2523-4064.2024/11-8/13