How can a term be vacuous when words are only used for coordination? And the reason you gave that it was vacuous isn't that it doesn't coordinate (because you replied back with more scribbles), but because there is no 'bedrock' - whatever that means. What would it mean for a term to be vacuous, or to have no bedrock, if terms are only used for coordinating actions between individuals?But your lay term 'aboutness' is vacuous, because unless you are a naive realist you have no 'bedrock'. My 'cordination of coordination' rests on the bedrock of 'action decisions' involved in physical, psychological and social 'prediction and control'. — fresco
I don't use words to paint shifting snapshots of an external world. I have shifting snapshots of a world in relation to me and I use words to categorize different sensory impressions under one sensory impression - a word - which is a visual scribble or sound. Words are not abstract. They exist out in the world as ink on paper, light on a computer screen, or as vibrations in the air. The abstraction lies in our mental representation for the cause of hearing sounds or seeing scribbles. The abstraction lies in our attempt to simulate the meaning, or the causal relationship between hearing or seeing sounds or scribbles and what caused them. What do the sounds or scribbles mean? How is it that I am having a visual experience of scribbles on a computer screen right now when looking at your post? What are those scribbles about? What are you trying to convey?Now part of that coordination certainly uses the abstract persistence of 'words' to mentally paint shifting snapshots of 'an external world', but my contextual 'snapshot' can never be guaranteed to be synonymous with yours. All that matters is a degree of mutual coordination as to what might happen next (which Maturana calls 'structural coupling'). — fresco
So now you are pointing to states-of-affairs with words - like studies and the development of twins, brain damaged vets, etc. Your words are about things - these states-of-affairs. If not, then I don't know what your are talking about. If you aren't talking about these things that are not words themselves, then you are just making scribbles on a screen that have no meaning other than the fact that you, fresco, put scribbles on a computer screen.I suggest you need to consider some of the empirical studies of language pathology to understand my position. For example, it is well known that the development of twins can be hampered by an ideosyncratic private language. And studies by Merleau-Ponty of brain damaged war veterans showed for example that the command word 'salute' produced no understanding but social situation of an officer entering the room produced immediate saluting action. — fresco
"Metaphor is not a mere embellishment; it is the basic means by which abstract thought is made possible. One of the principal results in cognitive science is that abstract concepts are typically understood, via metaphor, in terms of more concrete concepts." — Joshs
The idea of falsification is not science, it's metaphysics. The scientific method is metaphysics. Induction is metaphysics. — T Clark
I am afraid that I have to agree with the logical positivist view on the matter. As far as I am concerned, epistemology is the flagship of philosophy, while at the same time it is not clear whether metaphysics even makes sense. — alcontali
The strong, classical view assumes that the objects studied by metaphysics exist independently of any observer, so that the subject is the most fundamental of all sciences. Some philosophers, such as the logical positivists, and many scientists, reject the strong view of metaphysics as meaningless and unverifiable. — alcontali
What if nothing exists? Then first come the notion, the concept, and only then the word (philology/etymology), that supports epistemology, right? — James Pullman
Anyhow, this is pointless, right? — James Pullman
"An Essay on Metaphysics" by R.G. Collingwood — T Clark
So, I am incompatible with the practices of Oxford University Press. Furthermore, there is no doubt that I am more stubborn than them. There is simply no hope for them that they would defeat me in nay saying. That kind of people cannot make me adjust to them, because I have a long history of doing exactly the opposite, and always winning at that. As Nassim Taleb so beautifully wrote: The most intolerant wins. — alcontali
(meaning/value, what's the difference) — JosephS
It's about how math emerged onto the world stage solely by virtue of our attribution of specific non-negotiable meaning to certain marks and quantities and how that evolved into also talking about non physical things with meaningful marks... — creativesoul
assert Syllogism { all Socrates: univ, Man, Mortal: set univ | -- every man is mortal Man in Mortal -- Socrates is a man and (Socrates in Man) -- implies Socrates is mortal implies Socrates in Mortal } check Syllogism
The similarities between math and natural languages are many, but it seems you've neglected to take those into account. — creativesoul
The Princess Bride made my point better. — Noah Te Stroete
Essay on Metaphysics PDF — T Clark
I've spent some time thinking about this. To me, epistemology is part of metaphysics. If you look up definitions, it's about 50/50 whether others agree with me. I have always thought of metaphysics as the set of rules we agree on that gives us a common framework for looking at the world. Again, some agree, some disagree.
A paper that I have found very helpful is "An Essay on Metaphysics" by R.G. Collingwood. And by helpful, I mean he and I agree.
And I do agree that epistemology is the key to everything. The heart of the matter. But I think metaphysics is really the only thing that lets us agree on what makes sense and what doesn't. — T Clark
You seem to have taken great offense at Collingwood's essay. Is was not my intent to start a new discussion about it here. — T Clark
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.