The general algorithm is a logical division of things into figure and ground, signal and noise, information and entropy. — apokrisis
I was just reading Wittgenstein’s forgotten lesson. — Banno
That's not what I had in mind. .... It's more like seeing the duck or the rabbit, and realising that the same drawing gives rise to both. — Banno
I didn't so want. It was more that I wondered how you might answer @Harry Hindu. Is there in your opinion an explication of the meaning of "word"? Can you tell us what "word" means?A bad example if you want to dispute my position. — apokrisis
It was rather that distinction between the explicit and the ineffable, the said and the shown. — Banno
Can you tell us what "word" means? — Banno
What makes a particular sound coming from someone a word? — Harry Hindu
Once you learn it and become an expert at its use (which takes time and using it more than once, so using them takes practice and while you are practising you haven't yet rerouted the information from consciousness through your subconscious yet), then you don't need to focus on it any longer. — Harry Hindu
I asked you what if you used some word and I didn't respond as you predicted? Does that mean you used a word or not? — Harry Hindu
When that happens wouldn't you mentally revisit what you learned and consciously try to re-learn it's use, just as when something new happens when riding your bike or driving your car, you have to refocus your attention on what it is that you are doing and using? — Harry Hindu
You and Banno are avoiding answering the necessary questions. — Harry Hindu
And (I believe) it was my first reply to this thread that words aren't defined by other words, as they can be defined by pictures. I also asked if we were telepathic, would we use words.And yet you insist on our providing a definition. One might be tempted to conclude that you have not followed what is going on here, Harry. — Banno
If someone makes a fart noise with their mouth, does that qualify as a word being used? — Harry Hindu
Then words communicate. What do they communicate, Banno? I would agree that they don't communicate more words. They communicate ideas, which are made up of images, sounds, feelings, etc."Success in communication is judged by smoothness of conversation, by frequent predictability of verbal and nonverbal reactions, and by coherence and plausibility of native testimony. — Banno
You are't going to be intellectually honest either, I see. The question is simple, so stop trying to skew it into something that I did not ask.Sounds are not 'made into' words, they are sometimes referenced by words, sometimes even byt eh word 'word', but I can't make any sense of them being 'made into' words. — Isaac
I know what you were saying. What I was saying is that you are wrong. The fact that you don't need to focus on it any longer doesn't mean that it no longer points to it. It seems to me that you believe that when something is out of sight/mind, it no longer exists.Which is all I was saying. If there are circumstances where one doesn't need to focus on the image/concept anymore then there are circumstances in which the use of the word is not pointing to that image/concept anymore. — Isaac
Hand gestures? Facial expressions? Are hand gestures and facial expressions words?I asked you what if you used some word and I didn't respond as you predicted? Does that mean you used a word or not?
— Harry Hindu
What else would I have used? — Isaac
Are you sure that the only possible problem here is that I didn't hear you? How do you know the problem wasn't misunderstanding?No. I'd probably just say it again, but louder. — Isaac
Wow. It appears that you actually DO understand, as you are now asking where to look to find out what makes some sound a word, as you are asking me to point you in the right direction.You and Banno are avoiding answering the necessary questions.
— Harry Hindu
Right ho then. You tell me where to look and I'll do the legwork. where do I need to look to find out what sounds constitute a 'word' is? — Isaac
So the sound of someone gagging is a word?Phewee! Ugh! — Isaac
Who, or what, determines what sound or scribble is a word — Harry Hindu
The fact that you don't need to focus on it any longer doesn't mean that it no longer points to it. — Harry Hindu
appears that you actually DO understand, as you are now asking where to look to find out what makes some sound a word, as you are asking me to point you in the right direction. — Harry Hindu
So the sound of someone gagging is a word? — Harry Hindu
Instead, a pragmatic/semiotic view - a form of life view - would argue that both "the world" and "the self" are the two halves of a joint construction. And progress lies in constructing the better total model. They are not separate exercises. The problems of modern life lie in the way they got disconnected pretty fast after a moment of unity in the Enlightenment. Scientism and Romanticism began the business of "othering" each other in an unhelpful way.
Fetishising either the self or the world is the mistake. We need to be consciously engaged in a co-construction of these aspects of being alive and mindful. [Insert all the usual utopian visions of that here.] — apokrisis
yet so many begin their discussion with "let's first define our terms". — Banno
This sounds like a cliffnotes summary of the introduction to 'History of Ideas' by Idea Historian. — csalisbury
Instead of seeing the world as two cosmic forces in great battle, resolved triadically,... — csalisbury
If someone posts a bunch of pictures of them doing skateboard tricks. And then I say, looks like you've been photographing yourself doing skateboard tricks!! And then they say: 'oh you think I've been doing skateboard tricks do you?" then my response is: yeah....? And then they say 'you think I'm doing Rodney Mullen type skateboard tricks do you?!' I'd say 'No, I never brought up Rodney Mullen, I brought up the tricks you were doing, that you posted pictures of, why are you bring up Rodney Mullen?'That's exactly what I spent my three month lockdown sabbatical on - researching a defence of Hegelian history! — apokrisis
I don't see dichotomies, I see continuums. — Janus
but your response was to oppose a correct dichotomy, the right kind, susceptible to triadic reconciliation. I — csalisbury
But I wasn't impugning your use of time during quarantine (???) though it appears you are impugning mind. To be clear, are you responding to my post by asking if I'm having a rough go of it? — csalisbury
There was (a) the Enlightenment where the balance was at least close to correct, then (b) the split where there was set in opposition (i) a focus on the self vs (ii) a focus on the world... and we should then do (c) a harmonious reconciling of the two?
So the dichotomy between determinism and chance or freedom is false only as long as one insists that nature must be one or the other. Nature shows us both; in varying blends or degrees, or in various contexts or perspectives, I suppose. — Janus
...there are those who hold that any worthwhile theory of language must set out a specific set of instructions giving how meaning is to be determined. — Banno
You are against such totalising, even when it is a well proven success. You try to dismiss it as "pragmatic", as if being useful is a dirty word. You will blather on about poetry or feelings or other tribal artefacts of the anti-totalising brigade. — apokrisis
I've been reading William James all week. — csalisbury
like you think poems are people saying 'nature' in front of a bulldozer that says 'science — csalisbury
respond to the rest in the morning — csalisbury
What would that shared reason be?Who, or what, determines what sound or scribble is a word
— Harry Hindu
The community of language users using the word 'word' for a shared reason. — Isaac
The fact that you don't need to focus on it any longer doesn't mean that it no longer points to it. — Harry Hindu
Read your own post:How? — Isaac
So the word, "duck" points to what you learned, just as how you use a bicycle points to how you learned how to use the bicycle. Once you master riding the bicycle, you no longer think about maintaining your balance, but then you wouldn't be able to not focus on maintaining your balance without having learned how to do that. Causes/effects point to their effects/causes.If I say "duck!" just because I've learnt to say that word when a golf ball is flying towards someone, and you duck just because you've learned to do so when hearing the word "duck!", you're claiming the word still points to 'ducking' even though neither party involved thought of ducking. So the word had a property {pointing to ducking} despite the property not being attached to that word in either brain. I may be mistaken, as I thought you were a physicalist, if not, then I'm sorry for having wasted your time, if so, then where is this property, if not in either brain? — Isaac
Then I guess you weren't paying attention to StreelightX's posts. If you agree that words do point then I don't know what we're disagreeing about.Deflection is not an answer. No one here has said that words never point, so this line of argument is useless, and it still doesn't answer the question. — Isaac
What would that shared reason be? — Harry Hindu
So the word, "duck" points to what you learned, just as how you use a bicycle points to how you learned how to use the bicycle. — Harry Hindu
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.