Parlour Series: Words and Meaning

Parlour series events are hosted in members' homes, so they work a little differently from our public events. The group size will be smaller, so we give preference to people who have recently attended another event. If you're interested in joining, please add yourself to the waitlist! The address will be posted as a private comment below, visible only to attendees. It is near the location pin that is visible publicly. Also, the hosts have a few fluffy felines!

Let’s consider:

• Do we need to define our terms before we can discuss something meaningfully? Can a person use a word well without being able to define it? • Let's try to define an ordinary word such as "game," "chair," or "friend." Is there a single feature that every case shares, and if not, what holds the concept together? • Where does a word's meaning come from: dictionaries, the speaker's intentions, or how a community actually uses it? • When two people disagree, how can they tell whether they disagree about the world or only about the words they are using? • Some argue that many philosophical problems, such as questions about free will or the self, arise from confusions in language and would dissolve with clearer usage. Others argue these are real problems that clarification alone cannot settle. Which view do you find more persuasive? • Could a word have meaning for only one person, such as a private term for a sensation no one else can check? What would that tell us about the nature of language? • Should we deliberately revise the meanings of words such as "person," "family," or "democracy" when their current use seems confused or unjust? Who, if anyone, should have the authority to do so? • In public debates, the definition of a term like "violence," "freedom," or "harm" can decide the outcome before the argument begins. Is arguing over definitions a way to clarify an issue, or a way to win it?

No homework required, but if you’d like to reflect ahead of time, you can listen to the following podcast episode:

• Philosophize This!, Episode #097: Ludwig Wittgenstein https://www.philosophizethis.org/podcast/wittgenstein-pt-1

Shy Philosopher Night Procedure and Code of Ethics: 1. Discussion Style We aim for a cooperative flow, like passing a ball among teammates rather than engaging in back-and-forth debates. Please share the “ball” so everyone has a voice. 2. Brief Points (2-3 Minutes) Keep points concise so we can hear a variety of perspectives. Occasional exceptions may come up naturally, but our goal is inclusivity. 3. No Crosstalk Respect the speaker’s time without interjecting or questioning mid-speech. If you’d like to add something, simply raise your hand and the facilitator will guide the flow. 4. Avoid Ad Hominem Remarks Focus critiques on ideas, actions, or beliefs—not people. For example, say “This idea could have certain impacts” rather than “You’re wrong.” This ensures a respectful environment. 5. Respectful Engagement As we are guests in someone’s home, let’s maintain a high level of respect for the space and one another. Mindfulness, patience, and courtesy are essential to making this gathering comfortable and enjoyable for all. 6. Cancellation Courtesy If your plans change and you’re unable to attend, please let us know at least a day in advance by canceling your RSVP. Since space is limited, early notice helps ensure that someone else interested can join in your place. We really appreciate your understanding and help in making this a smooth, inclusive experience for everyone.

Looking forward to seeing you there!