Our Tools Are Extensions Of Our Purposes,

In The Performance Of An Illocutionary Act In The Literal Utterance Of A Sentence, The Speaker Intends To Produce A Certain Effect By Means Of Getting The Hearer To Recognize His Intention To Produce That Effect; And Furthermore, If He Is Using The Words Literally, He Intends This Recognition To Be Achieved In Virtue Of The Fact That The Rules For Using The Expressions He Utters Associate The Expression With The Production Of That Effect.

There Is No Success Or Failure In Nature.

We Often Attribute 'understanding' And Other Cognitive Predicates By Metaphor And Analogy To Cars, Adding Machines, And Other Artifacts, But Nothing Is Proved By Such Attributions.

Where Conscious Subjectivity Is Concerned, There Is No Distinction Between The Observation And The Thing Observed.

I Want To Block Some Common Misunderstandings About "understanding": In Many Of These Discussions One Finds A Lot Of Fancy Footwork About The Word "understanding."