On performativity
Axiom: Assume that there is some entity X which is such that there is no possible state of the world in which you would say anything about it.
Axiom: Define the relation "cares more about Y than X" such that for any entity Y in which there is a state of the world in which you would say something about it, you care more about Y than you do about X.
Lemma: Therefore, for any entity which you do comment about, you care more about it than you care about X.
Conclusion, after many ommitted stages: For any Y, it is always wrong (specifically, self-defeating in utterance) to say "I couldn't care less about Y" and correct (although tautologous) to say "I could care less about Y".
Isn't "I couldn't care less about Y" a statement about Y itself? ie: it's possible that there's no state of the world in which you care less about that given object, even if you could care less about something else.
ReplyDeleteMind you, this leaves statements like: "I couldn't care less about my family" perfectly valid, but still not meaning what the listener might think...
More exactly, the being of Dasein is could-care-less-ness.
ReplyDeleteHmm, Eric has a point, although this involves postulating the existence of items which I *necessarily* care about (ie, there is no state of the world in which I don't care about them at all[1]) - I guess I can't rule these out. Can the argument be repaired?
ReplyDelete[1] equivalently, no state in which I care about them as much as I care about X in all states.
That conclusion is no better than it ought to be.
ReplyDeleteIt may be that your utterance of or about Y could entirely be occasioned by the fact that your interlocutor mentioned it. So long as the item Y in question could be described or otherwise communicated, virtually anything could thereby be transformed from an X to a Y.
ReplyDeleteConstruing "care" to be "the slightest perturbation of one's mental state" simplifies this.
I couldn't care less than I do now.
ReplyDeleteThe amount of care I have is a minimum, a nadir, lower than a snake's belly ...
If care is C = xsquared then x is zero to me..
ReplyDeleteIsn't the point a bit like monetary policy in the liquidity trap? No matter how much you try, you can't get the nominal interest (heh) rate below zero. There is a zero bound on how interested you can be in a given topic.
ReplyDelete