Abstract

The misconception of communication by means of language is rife in early modern, modern and contemporary philosophy, philosophy of language, theoretical linguistics, neuro‐linguistics and psychology. An investigation into the essence or nature of the imagination is an investigation into the use of the word 'imagination', for essence is expressed by grammar. Someone who insists that he can imagine a stone's being conscious is indulging in mere image‐mongery. Unlike the narrator of a fairy‐tale or fable, his putative imagining has no consequences, save to stir up philosophical clouds of dust. The criteria of understanding lie in behaviour, in explanations and in the use one makes of a word or sentence, not in accompanying mental imagery. One can, for example, draw what one imagines, and this may illuminate the use of a sentence and clarify its sense. But in other cases, e.g. those of imagining another person dreaming, a wholly misleading picture may obtrude itself.