John Langshaw Austin: biography of this philosopher

The philosophy of language is one of the most interesting currents of those born in modern philosophy and one of its great representatives is the protagonist of this article.

john langshaw austin he is, perhaps, the greatest of the philosophers of language along with John Searle, Noam Chomsky and Ludwig Wittgenstein.

Born and raised in the UK, he is one of the authors, along with Searle, of the theory of acts of speaks, contributing the three main categories to the way in which human beings emit our phrases.

His life, though brief, has been one of the most influential in his field. Let's take a deeper look at his interesting story throughout this John Langshaw Austin biography.

• Related article: "How are Psychology and Philosophy similar?"

Biography of John Langshaw Austin

The life of this philosopher of language is characterized neither by publishing prolifically nor, unfortunately, by having lived many years. Even so, this British thinker knew how to take advantage of the years of his life, being

the creator of one of the most important theories in the field of psycholinguistics, in addition to having received a few awards.

1. Early years and training

John Langshaw Austin was born in Lancaster, England, on March 26, 1911.

In 1924 he enrolled at Shrewsbury School, where he studied the great classics of all time. Later he would study classical literature at Balliol College, in Oxford, in 1929.

in 1933 he received degrees in classical literature and philosophy, as well as the Gaisford Prize for Greek Prose. He finished those studies being the first in the class. In 1935 he began teaching at Magdalen College, also in Oxford. Later he would enter the field of Aristotle's philosophy, being a great reference throughout his life.

2. Formation of your thought

But among his earliest interests not only Aristotle could be found (later, between 1956 and 1957 Austin was president of the English Aristotelian Society). He also tackled Kant, Leibniz, and Plato. As for the most influential contemporaries of him, one can find G. AND. Moore, H. TO. Prichard and John Cook Wilson.

The vision of the most modern philosophers shaped his way of seeing the main questions of Western thought., and it was from this moment that he began to take special interest in the way in which human beings make specific judgments.

During World War II, Austin served his country by working in British Intelligence. In fact, it has been said that he was one of the most responsible in the preparation of D-day, that is, the D-Day.

John Austin left the army with the rank of lieutenant colonel and was awarded for his work in intelligence with the Order of the British Empire, the French War Cross and the American Legion Award for Merit.

3. Last years

After the war Austin he worked at Corpus Christi College, Oxford as a professor of moral philosophy.

In his lifetime, Austin was not particularly prolific in publishing (he only published seven articles), but this did not stop him from becoming famous. His influence was mainly due to the fact that he gave very interesting lectures. In fact, he became famous for giving some of them on Saturday mornings, something that for a teacher at the time was quite remarkable.

Thanks to this, and to the increase in his popularity, John Austin visited universities such as Harvard and Berkeley in the 1950s.

It is from these trips when the material to write arises. How to do things with words a posthumous work that collects, in essence, all of his philosophy of language. Also it was during these years that he had the opportunity to meet Noam Chomsky, becoming very good friends.

Unfortunately for the world of linguistics, John Langshaw Austin passed away at just 48 years of age, on February 8, 1960, shortly after being diagnosed with lung cancer.

Philosophy of language and its method

Austin had little satisfaction with the way philosophy was being carried out in his time, especially with logical positivism. According to this author, logical positivism was responsible for producing philosophical dichotomies that, instead of leaving things clear and help us understand the world around us, seemed to oversimplify reality and tended towards the dogmatism.

austin developed a new philosophical methodology, which would later lay the foundations of philosophy based on ordinary language. John Austin did not consider that this method was the only valid one, however, it did seem to bring the Western philosophers to the resolution of issues as long-standing as freedom, perception and responsibility.

For Austin, the starting point should be to analyze the forms and concepts used in mundane language, and recognize their limitations and biases. This would reveal those errors that had been made since time immemorial in philosophy.

According to this author, in everyday language are all the distinctions and connections established by human beings. It is as if words had evolved through natural selection, with the shortest surviving. adapted to the linguistic context and those that would allow describing the world that human beings we perceive. This would be influenced by each culture, expressing itself in a different way of seeing things.

speech act theory

Speech act theory is surely John Austin's best known contribution to the field of philosophy of language. Speech act theory is a theory of how communicative intentions are manifested. In this theory, the concepts of intention and action are incorporated as fundamental elements of the uses of language.

In his time, most philosophers were interested in how formal language worked, that is, the language that is formed with logical rules. An example of formal language would be the following: mammals suck, dogs suck, therefore dogs are mammals. However, Austin chose to describe how everyday language is used to describe and change reality.

One of the most interesting aspects of Austin's interest in ordinary language was his realization of how, depending on what is said, it is possible to create a situation in itself. That is to say, there are expressions that, when emitted, are in themselves what they are describing what is done. To make it better understood:

Being at a wedding, the priest who officiates the ceremony, after giving the couple the rings, says out loud: 'I hereby declare you husband and wife'. By saying 'I declare', the priest is not describing a reality, he is creating it. Through his words he has made two people officially a married couple. And this has been carried out through a speech act, in this case, a statement.

Thus, speech acts are understood to be those linguistic expressions, both oral and written, that when emitted they imply a change in reality by themselves, that is, they are what they say they are doing.

Within Austin's theory, with a speech act, a term that was originally used by John Searle and Peter Strawson, reference is made to utterances that constitute, by themselves, an act that implies some type of change in terms of the relationship between interlocutors, as has been seen in the case of the wedding.

Within the same theory, John Austin distinguishes between three types of acts:

1. Locutorious speech acts

They are just saying something. It is what the act of the human being saying or writing something is called, regardless of whether it is true or not or whether it constitutes a change in reality by itself.

2. illocutionary speech acts

They are acts that describe the intention of the speaker in being uttered. For example, a case of an illocutionary act would be to congratulate, which already implies doing an act, which is to congratulate.

3. perlocutionary speech acts

They are the effects or consequences that arise from the act of issuing an illocutionary act, that is, the response of having said something, be it a congratulation, insult, order...

They are acts carried out by the fact of enunciating something. They reflect the result of an act enunciated by the speaker which has produced an effect on the listener.

There is not enough to recognize the intention of the speaker, but also the receiver must believe it. They are not executed for the simple fact of enunciating them.