My Drivers License Is Clipped Can I Fly

Follow the rules / 5

might seem, then, that any rule can be interpreted in an arbitrary manner, and thus, ultimately, did not even make sense to speak of rules.
But in reality, when we follow a rule, we do so according to the habits that we have already acquired basic training in In the past we have received:

When I follow the rule do not choose.
I follow the rule blindly (1).

You could say, therefore, that there is no space for individual will, but at the same time we can not think that there is a true interpretation , genuine rule of always already has its way . Rather, it is as if the rules are missing rationale, rational, and derive their sense from the outside

"But as a rule can teach me what I should do in this point? Whatever I do, can always be made compatible with the rule by some interpretation. "- No, you should not say that. We should instead say: Each interpretation is suspended in the air together with the interpretation, one can not serve as support for this. The interpretations, alone do not determine the meaning (2).

(1) L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations , Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 219, p. 114.
(2) L. Wittgenstein, Searches philosophical Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 198, p. 107.

Mobile Phone Jammer Legal In Australia??

Follow the rules / 4

follow a rule, therefore, is not something that can be communicated only through descriptions. Since the descriptions should be interpreted, as well as the interpretations are, in turn, interpreted.
For this, follow a rule is a practice, and to learn how to follow a rule is needed to training.

During this training will show equal lengths, equal shapes, colors equals: and he will in turn find them and play them, and so on. The start, for example, to continue 'equally' a pattern, when it receives a certain order. - And to continue progressions, for example to continue. .. ..., Like this: .... ..... ...... The
how do you do, and he does as I do, and affect him with expressions consensus, rejection, expectation, encouragement. I let it do, or detain him, and so on.
Imagine being witness to a kind of training. No words would be defined by itself, does not it would fall under any logical circle.
During this training would also explain the terms "and so on" and "and so on ad infinitum." To do so could be used, among other things, a gesture. The gesture that means "keep going!" and "so on" has a similar function to an object or a place of the unspeakable (1).

From this point of view, the learning of theoretical content is a form of apprenticeship .
why we still need teachers.

(1) L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations , Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 208, pp. 110-111.

Lobster Fishing Boat Design

Follow the rules / 3

Faced with a rule, generally we have the conviction that there is a correct interpretation that will explain how to follow the rule.
But there is a correct interpretation? And above all: what is it?

When we are faced with a sign with an arrow pointing forward that we continue to teach us. Suppose, however, that a person who comes when he sees the sign back, because he believes that sign to indicate exactly what you're doing. Then we will explain the significance of the cartel, in fact , is to go forward. But the other says that he is exactly going forward, he understood in this way going forward.
We could try to explain further, but could still not understand, until we decide to show an action to our party what it means for us to follow the cartel.

Or think to ask a mathematician to complete the following sequence: 1, 2, 3, 4, ...
The mathematician, unexpectedly, complete with the numbers 5:48, 8.4, 14.2, ... We do not
We disagree, arguing that the proper continuation is obviously 5, 6, 7, ..., but the math says that its completion is given by a sequence derived from the simplest polynomial which can be derived also first part of the succession.
In short, if P (x) = x 4 / 50-x 3 / 5 + 2 x 7 / 10 +12 / 25, then we have that P (1) = 1, P (2 ) = 2, P (3) = 3, P (4) = 4, P (5) = 5:48, P (6) = 8.4, P (7) = 14.2, ...

be within the meanings we fail to highlight what is the correct interpretation.

Our paradox was this: a rule can not determine any way to act, since any mode of action may be brought in agreement with the rule. The answer was: If it can be made an agreement with the rule may also be put at odds with it. Here there are therefore no contradiction or agreement (1).

But what we wanted to prove with this talk? That any rule can be interpreted in an arbitrary manner?
The aim, rather, is to show that there is an unbridgeable gap between interpretation of a rule and mode of action.
If, then, we are convinced that a rule must be followed in a very specific way, where does that course of action? Surely not interpretation, but from a training .

(1) L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations , Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 201, p. 108.

Were Can I Watch South Park On My Ipod Online

Follow the rules / 2

What is the relationship between the expression of a rule and follow the rule?

Suppose you are in a foreign country and meet the following unknown symbol: x & 2. We note, at a local, but whatever explanation seems incomprehensible.
Then the local resident writes a series of equalities: 1 & 2 = 2, 2 & 2 = 4, 3 & 2 = 6, 4 & 2 = 8, 5 & 2 = 10, ... and we seem to have understood: "X & 2" means x multiply by 2. However
certainty that we have understood the rule associated with the symbol? The rule covers a multitude of cases, while we can control only a finite number.

So depending on what we learn to follow a rule? Any explanation must always be interpreted and leads to a further interpretation. Each set of examples is insufficient because it is necessarily finite, while the rule is an infinite number of cases.
Perhaps, then, we learn to follow a rule because we trained to do so in this sense "'follow the rule' is a practice. And believe to follow the rule does not follow the rule."

Let me ask: What has to share the expression of the rule - say a road - with my actions? What kind of connection exists between the two? - Well, maybe this: I was trained to react in a certain way to this sign, and now I react like that.
But this way you only have shown a causal link, you just explained why we are now set according to the directions of a traffic signal, not in what sense, exactly, this will follow a signal. No, I also pointed out that one rule according to the instructions of a traffic signal just as there is a stable use, habit "(1).

(1) L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations , Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 198, p. 107.

Kyphosis In Jacksonville Fl

Follow the rules / 1

What does it mean to follow a rule?
Suppose that we are in a foreign country, and to see a road sign with an arrow pointing forward. How to interpret this sign? We would be inclined to follow the arrow, but there is no doubt that the sign that goes interpreted differently.
We ask, then, a local resident passing nearby to be interpreted as a sign, and he tells us that we need to go straight. Reassured by the explanation we put in motion following the arrow, when the person who has just given explanations begins to cry making us understand that we were wrong, that you can not go in that direction.

We asked the ' correct interpretation of the cartel, but we understood? Perhaps we also need the interpretation of Interpretation: what he meant straight there?

What is needed to correctly follow a rule? It seems that an interpretation is not enough, nor the interpretation of interpretation, as it could go on forever.

A rule stands there like a signpost. - Leaves no room for doubt about the road I take? It tells me which way I do when I went through? If I continue on the road, or to predict the path, or go through the fields? But where is it written in which direction should I follow that signal? If I have to go in the direction indicated by the finger or rather (for example). In the opposite direction? (1)

(1) L. Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations , Einaudi 1983 (1953), § 85, p. 56.