| Thread Closed |
definitions of words and misinterpretation |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Mar3-07, 07:28 AM | #1 |
|
|
definitions of words and misinterpretationThen, whenever a need arises, they could put "(def #153)" link to this thread to clear thing up without having to explain themselves again in every thread they post in. What do you think? (edit: in guidelines, "explicitly defining key terms" is suggestion #1, btw) |
| Mar3-07, 07:55 AM | #2 |
|
|
And what if they disagree on the definitional level?
|
| Mar3-07, 08:00 AM | #3 |
|
|
At least they will be able to understand each other.
|
| Mar3-07, 08:03 AM | #4 |
|
|
definitions of words and misinterpretation
Did he actually say that? I've said that a lot of times before.
|
| Mar3-07, 09:34 AM | #5 |
|
|
I said somewhere else that a language breakthrough would be very needed to make unequivocal statements that everyone can follow. I find it difficult and time consuming to come up with unequivocal terms. Take a definition that should be simple:
universe: everything that exists. Alright, but what does it mean to exist? What is a thing? And that "every" part, does it mean each one, does it mean every one, or something else? In a philosophical discussion, different people will inevitably interpret even this short definition differently. Being unequivocal is difficult. It may require a whole new dictionary where every word has one and only one meaning. English probably doesn't have enough words for all meanings since many words have multiple interpretations. You may need entirely new words to pinpoint specific, unequivocal meanings, culminating in a much longer dictionary containing terms nobody recognizes except the select few. I don't have a solution to this. Maybe I just have an exaggerated perception of the problem. Maybe someone actually has a breakthrough solution. |
| Mar5-07, 02:01 AM | #6 |
|
|
You could have different definitions for different discussions, but total number of these definitions should be quite small (imho).
In your example, "universe: everything that exists", btw, how does "universe" is different from "everything"? |
| Mar5-07, 08:46 AM | #7 |
|
|
Another definition of "universe" might simply be "all".
|
| Mar5-07, 08:58 AM | #8 |
|
|
|
| Mar5-07, 10:12 AM | #9 |
|
|
definition 1: dispute is an argued disgreement
|
| Mar5-07, 01:26 PM | #10 |
|
|
If anyone here studies philosophy/and or linguistics, he/she could never demand some universal definitions of words. One can just define words in some context. Since there is no fiexed context and never will be, this discussion of definitions is non-productive. Words, contrary to preconceived notions, are not definitions of meanings. Its is the context for that word that determines the meaning of it. On top of it all, words->thoughts are not independent of the its content. The notion that we learn language/thinking by pointing at things and label them is surelly a incorect one. What we end up doing is spiraling down through dead level abstractions untill we are completely lost, misusing language and abusing thinking process, unable to look at things from different context.
|
| Mar5-07, 04:23 PM | #11 |
|
|
Of course not universal (and because of that this thread is useless), but when ever making a discussion thread you should always define the words you are using so others can interpret them better so people can discuss it better.
|
| Mar6-07, 02:36 AM | #12 |
|
|
|
| Thread Closed |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: definitions of words and misinterpretation
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| A few definitions | Cosmology | 0 | ||
| Looking for definitions | Advanced Physics Homework | 0 | ||
| Definitions | Classical Physics | 2 | ||
| Definitions | Current Events | 4 | ||
| The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle --> Life is uncertain | General Discussion | 2 | ||