Vagueness: 'I know'
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    When a person says, "I know", what do they really mean?

    It seems inherent, that we assume that the other person "knows"; but, this is prone even to doubt and vagueness about using that phrase.

    Therefore, how can we qualify the statement or word-phrase, "I know"?

    Is this possible, and has already been implemented in our childhood and adolescent life that is education?

    Or stated, otherwise, how does one set up a schema to decrease the vagueness of the word phrase "I know"?
    Shawn Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    \
    It seems inherent, that we assume that the other person "knows"; but, this is prone even to doubt and ambiguity about using that phrase.... Or stated, otherwise, how does one set up a schema to decrease the ambiguity of the word phrase "I know"? — Wallows

    What ambiguity? If someone says he knows, maybe he does, maybe he doesn't, but what is ambiguous about the claim itself?
    tim wood Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    What ambiguity? If someone says he knows, maybe he does, maybe he doesn't, but what is ambiguous about the claim itself? — tim wood

    Sorry, I got the whole thread wrong. I meant to say, how does one eliminate the vagueness of that phrase?
    Shawn Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    Sorry, I got the whole thread wrong. I meant to say, how does one eliminate the vagueness of that phrase? — Wallows

    The truth of it? I doubt you mean that. But what does that leave? If I say I weigh 196 pounds, that's both vague and precise, depending on how accurate one wants to be. But the claim itself, that I weigh 196 pounds, with respect to appropriate criteria is not at all ambiguous. I'm thinking you understand my question.
    tim wood Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    I'm thinking you understand my question. — tim wood

    Yeah, well, that sort of thing happens when we interchange the next logical progression of "I know ***"

    That, and how-***
    Shawn Options
  • A Seagull
    615
    Sorry, I got the whole thread wrong. I meant to say, how does one eliminate the vagueness of that phrase? — Wallows

    Why do you want to?
    A Seagull Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Why do you want to? — A Seagull

    To enhance communication/language use?
    Shawn Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    I mean, you can think of it as trying to get informal languages as close to formal ones as much as possible?
    Shawn Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Education teaches us, or at the highest levels, that vagueness is bad for academic writing.

    So, it's also baked into the system of thought itself.
    Shawn Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    Basics: I weigh 196 pounds. Any ambiguity?

    Or/and can you provide an example of a proposition that is an example of the sort of ambiguity you mean?

    "I know..," doesn't do it for me, because I find zero ambiguity in it. Whether it's true or not a whole other topic.
    tim wood Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    "I know..," doesn't do it for me, because I find zero ambiguity in it. Whether it's true or not a whole other topic. — tim wood

    Whell, that's part of the topic-subject hereabouts.

    Is "I know..." truth-apt or not?
    Shawn Options
  • Qwex
    366
    I know thinking as the action side of thought.

    When someone thinks, they use knowledge and environment. When someone says I know they refer to wisdom or a phenomenon.

    Is this purely an action? Knowing? Referring to your wisdom or phenomena directly, that process?

    You may just as well not think of wisdom as a pattern of knowledge but instead as a shell of knowledge.

    You can know in the short and long terms.
    Qwex Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    Is "I know..." truth-apt or not? — Wallows

    As it stands, its meaning is set by convention. And as it stands, it seems to me, the truth of it is verified by evidence wrt some criteria, wrt a degree of satisfaction under those criteria. E.g., "I weigh 196 pounds," is arguably never, ever exactly true. .
    tim wood Options
  • Streetlight
    9.1k
    When a person says, "I know", what do they really mean? — Wallows

    Have you considered asking said person?

    Might seem rude if you didn't, is all.
    Streetlight Options
  • A Seagull
    615
    Education teaches us, or at the highest levels, that vagueness is bad for academic writing.

    So, it's also baked into the system of thought itself.     — Wallows

    The problem you refer to lies within language itself. Words inherently have a range of meanings. If I have an image in my mind that I am trying to communicate there are only a limited number of words that I can choose from (and even selecting an appropriate word is a complex process) and the final communication can only be a poor representation of the picture in my mind. If you go for too much rigour in the communication one does so with an associated lack of accuracy.
    A Seagull Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    As it stands, its meaning is set by convention. And as it stands, it seems to me, the truth of it is verified by evidence wrt some criteria, wrt a degree of satisfaction under those criteria. E.g., "I weigh 196 pounds," is arguably never, ever exactly true. . — tim wood

    OK, so you're already assuming some pragmatic account of shared meaning, correct?
    Shawn Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Have you considered asking said person? — StreetlightX

    Yes, and no. As soon as I think about it the problem magnifies.

    Should or ought-to, I ask that or how or why or when?

    See the point?
    Shawn Options
  • Streetlight
    9.1k
    See the point? — Wallows

    No.
    Streetlight Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    The problem you refer to lies within language itself. — A Seagull

    On point.

    Words inherently have a range of meanings. If I have an image in my mind that I am trying to communicate there are only a limited number of words that I can choose from (and even selecting an appropriate word is a complex process) and the final communication can only be a poor representation of the picture in my mind. — A Seagull

    Well, it's not so much the limits at language, manifest in saying like "A picture is worth a thousand words"; but, rather, why the problem exists in the first place? Zooming out...
    Shawn Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    OK, so you're already assuming some pragmatic account of shared meaning, correct? — Wallows
    Absent that, nothing, not even noise, not even silence, not even gesture.
    tim wood Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    ↪StreetlightX


    See my convo with @A Seagull. Does that help?
    Shawn Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Absent that, nothing, not even noise, not even silence, not even gesture. — tim wood

    What do you mean?

    I feel like your reaching out for the outliers here; but, I don't know what's the point of that.

    @Banno's showing and telling is sufficient to get the point across?
    Shawn Options
  • Streetlight
    9.1k
    Does that help? — Wallows

    No.

    Most people are not at all vague when they claim to know something.

    This thread is what happens when language goes on holiday.
    Streetlight Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Most people are not at all vague when they claim to know something. — StreetlightX

    This sort of reminds me of the "Language is not passing information from one head to another" thread, in which I never participated in.

    This thread is what happens when language goes on holiday. — StreetlightX

    Please be more specific.
    Shawn Options
  • Streetlight
    9.1k
    Please be more specific. — Wallows

    I don't want to be rude, so I'd prefer not to.
    Streetlight Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    OK, so you're already assuming some pragmatic account of shared meaning, correct?
    — Wallows
    Absent that, nothing, not even noise, not even silence, not even gesture.     — tim wood
    What do you mean? — Wallows

    If no shared meaning, then no communication. (Communication defined as sharing/shared meaning.)

    Let's imagine that you and I have no shared meaning. What meaning, then, do you attach to the 100 symbols in this post immediately following this question mark:?
    tim wood Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    I don't want to be rude, so I'd prefer not to. — StreetlightX

    OK, so, let's take that implicit example. Tact, appropriateness adhere to what standards, here?
    Shawn Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    Let's imagine that you and I have no shared meaning. What meaning, then, do you attach to the 100 symbols in this post immediately following this question mark:? — tim wood

    None?

    Not seeing the point here.
    Shawn Options
  • tim wood
    9.2k
    Not seeing the point here. — Wallows
    That communication presupposes the mutual ability to communicate - as defined above. But you're concerned with ambiguity, is that correct? I weigh 196 pounds. What is ambiguous about that?
    tim wood Options
  • A Seagull
    615
    Well, it's not so much the limits at language, manifest in saying like "A picture is worth a thousand words"; but, rather, why the problem exists in the first place? Zooming out... — Wallows

    Language has the sole purpose of communication. And of course there are limits to the efficacy of communication, you can think of it as a bandwidth problem.
    A Seagull Options
  • Shawn
    13.2k
    But you're concerned with ambiguity, is that correct? I weigh 196 pounds. What is ambiguous about that? — tim wood

    Well, that's an observational statement about something within the world-view of any participants of the conversation. Rather scientific and exact. But, most of the language isn't like that, so we might assume this as a statement immune to the sentiments of the need to qualify statements that are quantitative.
    Shawn Options
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment