The paper is now out: link.springer.com/article/10.1...

The paper will come out in a couple of weeks--I'll be happy to share it!

Thanks for the helpful reply. Are we ever concerned purely with human meaning? To put it differently, it seems that any question about human meaning, if genuine, is going to turn into a question about cosmic meaning. But I take the point that this need not mean the questions are in fact one.

Are the two ways of asking the question genuinely distinguishable from the point of view of the agent? If one is genuinely worried about the meaningfulness of one’s life, one’s worry will not be addressed by observing that one’s life is more meaningful than the lives of others, it seems to me.

I suppose the question is: Why must following a rule be viewed as a practice? Perhaps it is because other ways of conceiving it lead to paradox. At any rate, Kripke is clear enough, I think, that he is not offering scholarly commentary on Wittgenstein.

Thank you!

Is it being shown in Montreal?

When an issue concerning Frege came up in the discussion of a different paper, Greg produced, to everyone’s amazement, a copy of the Grundlagen, which he had in his bag. It was important for him always to be ready to get Frege straight. (3/3)

My mother had died two weeks earlier, and I had just returned from Bucharest the day before. Greg’s gentle presence made the day easier to bear, especially during the dinner. His talk was on Fitch’s paradox of knowability. (2/x)

Philosophy at its best!