The Thoughts Of Bentham Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Russell (1961: 740):

He recognises association of ideas and language, and also association of ideas and ideas.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, ideas are the meanings of language, which are projected by mental processes, and which are realised by the wordings of language, these projected as locutions by verbal processes.  Once established in the ontogenesis of language in individuals, the meanings of language can be incorporated and expressed in the other semiotic systems that language makes possible, such as diagrams etc.

The Thoughts Of Schopenhauer Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics [4]

Russell (1961: 727):

Historically, two things are important about Schopenhauer: his pessimism, and his doctrine that will is superior to knowledge. … More important than pessimism was the doctrine of the primacy of the will. … In one form or another, the doctrine that the will is paramount has been held by many modern philosophers, notably Nietzsche, Bergson, James, and Dewey.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, the distinction between will and knowledge is the distinction between desiderative consciousness (a senser desiring) and the contents of cognitive consciousness (the projected ideas of a senser thinking).

The Thoughts Of Schopenhauer Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics [3]

Russell (1961: 724):

But the will that is behind phenomena cannot consist of a number of different volitions.  Both time and space, according to Kant — and in this Schopenhauer agrees with him — belong only to phenomena; the thing–in–itself is not in space and time.  My will, therefore, in the sense that it is real, cannot be dated, nor can it be composed of separate acts of will, because it is space and time that are the source of plurality — the principle of 'individuation'*, to use the scholastic phrase which Schopenhauer prefers.  My will, therefore, is one and timeless.  Nay, more, it is to be identified with the will of the whole universe; my separateness is an illusion, resulting from my subjective apparatus of spatio-temporal perception.  What is real is one vast will, appearing in the whole course of nature, animate and inanimate alike.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, volition — desiderative mental processes — is in space and time, since all processes are construed to unfold in time, and volition, space and time are all construals of experience as meaning.

From the perspective of Eastern philosophy, Schopenhauer has identified 

• the Buddhist notion of 'the world beyond pairs of opposites' — 'beyond fear and desire' — with Kant's noumena, and 
• the Buddhist notion of 'undifferentiated consciousness' — in 'the world beyond pairs of opposites' — just with desiderative consciousness.

* The term 'individuation' has been used by some members of the SFL community, but not with comprehension.

The Thoughts Of Schopenhauer Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics [2]

Russell (1961: 724):

Kant had maintained that a study of the moral law can take us behind phenomena, and give us knowledge which sense-perception cannot give; he also maintained that moral law is essentially concerned with the will. The difference between a good man and a bad man is, for Kant, a difference in the world of things–in–themselves, and is also a difference as to volitions. It follows that, for Kant, volitions must belong to the real world, not to the world of phenomena. The phenomenon corresponding to a volition is a bodily movement; that is why, according to Schopenhauer, the body is the appearance of which will is the reality.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, Schopenhauer ascribes the semiotic construal that is desiderative consciousness to the domain outside semiotic construals.

volitions	must belong to	the real world (things–in–themselves/noumena)
Carrier: possessed	Process: relational: possession	Attribute: possessor
a senser desiring	must belong to	the experience that is construed as meaning

Moreover, Schopenhauer regards desiderative mental processes as 'reality' (noumena) and their corresponding bodily material processes as mere 'appearance' (phenomena).

noumenon = reality	phenomenon= appearance
volition	bodily movement
a senser desiring	an actor doing

The Thoughts Of Schopenhauer Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics [1]

Russell (1961: 723-4):

Schopenhauer's system is an adaptation of Kant's, but one that emphasises quite different aspects of the Critique from those emphasised by Fichte or Hegel.  They got rid of the thing–in–itself, and thus made knowledge metaphysically fundamental.  Schopenhauer retained the thing–in–itself, but identified it with the will.  He held that what appears to perception as my body is really my will.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, Schopenhauer identified the experience that is construed semiotically as 'my body' with desiderative consciousness: a senser desiring.

the experience that is construed semiotically as 'my body'	is	desiderative consciousness: a senser desiring
Identified Token	Process: relational	Identifier Value

That is, Schopenhauer locates the semiotic construal of experience as desiderative consciousness outside the domain of semiotic construal (meaning).

The Thoughts Of Romantics vs Rationalists Through Systemic Functional Linguistics

Russell (1961: 696):

The romantic form of revolt is very different from the rationalist form, though both are derived from the French Revolution and the philosophers who immediately preceded it.  The romantic form is to be seen in Byron in an unphilosophical dress, but in Schopenhauer and Nietzsche it has learnt the language of philosophy.  It tends to emphasise the will as the expense of the intellect, to be impatient of chains of reasoning, and to glorify violence of certain kinds.  In practical politics it is important as an ally of nationalism.  In tendency, if not always in fact, it is definitely hostile to what is commonly called reason, and tends to be anti-scientific.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, the distinction between the will and the intellect is the distinction between to two types of projecting mental processes — mental symbolic processing — desiderative and cognitive, respectively.  Desiderative processes project proposals, commands and offers, whereas cognitive processes project propositions, statements and questions.  Hence the alignment of the will with nationalism and the alignment of the intellect with science.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [10]

Russell (1961: 685):

Kant, like Berkeley and Hume, though in not quite the same way, goes further [than Locke], and makes the primary qualities also subjective.  Kant does not at most times question that our sensations have causes, which he calls 'things-in-themselves' or 'noumena'.  What appears to us in perception, which he calls a 'phenomenon', consists of two parts: that due to the object, which he calls the 'sensation', and that due to our subjective apparatus, which, he says, causes the manifold to be ordered in certain relations.  This latter part he calls the form of the phenomenon.  This part is not itself sensation, and therefore not dependent upon the accident of environment; it is always the same, since we carry it about with us, and it is a priori in the sense that it is not dependent on experience.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, all qualities, primary and secondary, are intersubjective construals of experience as meaning.

Kant's 'noumena' might be compared with the experiences that are mentally construed as meaning, as phenomena, with the provisos that these are not 'things' or 'objects' unless they are construed as such, and that it is the impact on the body that is construed as meaning, as mental phenomena.

Kant's 'sensation' might be compared with the phenomenon of a perceptual mental process, as instance, whereas Kant's 'form' of the phenomenon might be compared with the phenomenon of a cognitive mental process, as systemic potential.

	phenomenon of cognition	phenomenon of perception
system	‘form’
instance		‘sensation’

The Thoughts Of Locke In Systemic Functional Linguistics [7]

Russell (1961: 685):

Locke had accustomed the world to the idea that the secondary qualities — colours, sounds, smells, etc. — are subjective, and do not belong to the object as it is in itself.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, all qualities and objects — whether perceptual or cognitive — are intersubjective construals of experience as meaning.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [9]

Russell (1961: 685):

Kant holds that the immediate objects of perception are due partly to external things and partly to our own perceptive apparatus.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, perceptual phenomena are the mental construals of experience — the impact of the environment on the body — as meaning.  As meanings, perceptual phenomena may be the ranges of mental processes, or the external causes of mental processes.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [8]

Russell (1961: 683):

The essence of morality is to be derived from the concept of law; for, though everything in nature acts according to laws, only a rational being has the power of acting according to the idea of law; i.e. by Will.  The idea of an objective principle in so far as it is compelling to the will is called a command of the reason, and the formula of the command is called an imperative.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, 'everything in nature acts according to laws' blurs the modality distinction between modalisation (usuality/probability) and modulation (obligation/inclination).  The laws of physics, for example, are laws in the sense of modalisation.

In contrast, 'the power of acting according to the idea of law…by Will' corresponds only to modulation, not to modalisation.  The 'Will' corresponds to a Senser desiring, the Nucleus of a desiderative mental clause.  Desiderative mental processes project proposals, commands and offers, which are agnate with obligation and inclination (modulation).  Commands are congruently realised by imperative mood.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [7]

Russell (1961: 681):

Space and time, Kant says, are not concepts; they are forms of 'intuition'.  (The German word is 'Anschauung', which means literally 'looking at' or 'view'.  The word 'intuition', though the accepted translation, is not altogether a satisfactory one.)

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, 'space' and 'time' are concepts, and concepts that are expressed in wording are the meanings of language.  'Space' and 'time' are construals of experience as meaning.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [6]

Russell (1961: 680):

[For Kant] Space and time are subjective, they are part of our apparatus of perception.  But just because of this, we can be sure that whatever we experience will exhibit the characteristics dealt with by geometry and the science of time. … since you always wear spatial spectacles in your mind, you are sure of always seeing everything in space.  Thus geometry is a priori in the sense that it must be true of everything experienced, but we have no reason to suppose that anything analogous is true of things in themselves, which we do not experience.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional theory, space and time (and things in space-time) are construals of experience as meaning, and meaning is intersubjective, rather than merely subjective, because language is a social semiotic system.  The ontogenesis of meaning potential in each individual involves the social interaction of individuals.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [5]

Russell (1961: 680):

[For Kant] Things in themselves, which are the causes of our sensations, are unknowable; they are not in space or time, they are not substances, nor can they be described by any of these other general concepts which Kant calls 'categories'.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, there is a distinction between perceptual experience and our construal of that experience as meaning.  Things are not 'things' until /unless they are construed as (those categories of) meaning, mentally or verbally.  By the same token, space and time are not 'space' and 'time' until/unless they are construed as (those categories of) meaning, mentally or verbally.  Contra Kant, it is precisely by construing experience as such meanings that experience is described and knowable.  This is not to deny experience, merely to distinguish it from its semiotic construal as things, space and time.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [4]

Russell (1961: 680):

According to Kant, the outer world causes only the matter of sensation, but our own mental apparatus orders this matter in space and time, and supplies the concepts by means of which we understand experience.

Blogger Comment:

This is very close to the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, whereby experiential Tokens are mentally assigned semiotic Values.  A qualification is that, from the SFL perspective, any talk or thought of the outer material domain and the inner mental domain is itself the construal of experience as meaning.

The Logical Thoughts Of Russell On Kant Vs Systemic Functional Linguistics

Russell (1961: 679):

[For Kant] a 'synthetic' proposition is one that is not analytic. All the propositions that we know only through experience are synthetic. … But Kant, unlike Leibniz and all other previous philosophers, will not admit the converse, that all synthetic propositions are only known through experience.

Blogger Comment:

In presenting the following pair of propositions as converse:

1. all the propositions that we know only through experience are synthetic
2. all synthetic propositions are only known through experience

Russell is construing them, from the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, as two attributive clauses:

1.

All the propositions that we know only through experience	are	synthetic
Carrier	Process	Attribute
Subject	Finite	Complement
Mood		Residue

The above construes all the propositions that we know only through experience as members of the class synthetic.

2.

All synthetic propositions	are	only	known through experience
Carrier	Process		Attribute
Subject	Finite	Adjunct: counterexpectancy: limiting	Complement
Mood			Residue

The above construes all synthetic propositions as members of the class (only) known through experience.

However, this second construal varies slightly from the grammar of the clause, as worded:

2a.

All synthetic propositions	are	only	known	through experience
Phenomenon	Process:		mental	Manner: means
Subject	Finite	Adjunct: counterexpectancy: limiting	Predicator	Adjunct
Mood			Residue

The above construes all synthetic propositions as Phenomena of one means of cognitive mental processing.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [3]

Russell (1961: 679):

[For Kant] a 'synthetic' proposition is one that is not analytic.  All the propositions that we know only through experience are synthetic.  We cannot, by mere analysis of concepts, discover such truths as 'Tuesday was a wet day' or 'Napoleon was a great general'.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, all propositions are instances of interpersonal potential; and all the propositions that we know are ideas projected by sensers engaged in mental processes.  For propositions, the scale between positive and negative polarity is modalisation: degrees of probability or usuality.

The Thoughts Of Kant Through Systemic Functional Linguistics [2]

Russell (1961: 679):

[For Kant] an 'analytic' proposition is one in which the predicate is part of the subject; for instance, 'a tall man is a man', or 'an equilateral triangle is a triangle'.  Such propositions follow from the law of contradiction; to maintain that a tall man is not a man would be self-contradictory.

Blogger Comment:

From the perspective of Systemic Functional Linguistic theory, these analytic propositions are statements of class membership, realised by attributive declarative clauses.

Carrier	Process	Attribute
a tall man	is	a man
an equilateral triangle	is	a triangle
Subject	Finite	Complement
Mood		Residue

That is:

• a tall man is a member of the class a man
• an equilateral triangle is a member of the class a triangle

Viewed at group rank:

a	tall	man	=	a	man
Deictic	Epithet	Thing		Deictic	Thing

an	equilateral	triangle	=	a	triangle
Deictic	Classifier	Thing		Deictic	Thing

That is:

• a sub-classified Thing is a member of the class Thing