Meaning that all words denote existent entities? — TheGreatArcanum
Why must we understand language to understanding being? — TheGreatArcanum
my contention is that meaning is prior to language, or rather, that meaning isn’t to be found in language and propositions, but in what the words of those propositions represent. — TheGreatArcanum
structuralism is less controversial surely — Kenosha Kid
Not all words are nouns. — Banno
Do abstract objects have causal power? If so, they exist. To measure the dimensions, compare the size of the object to other objects. That is how we measure the size of anything - by comparing it to other objects with similar properties (like length, weight and duration). Are words any more abstract than the ink and paper they are composed of?Do abstract objects exist? If abstract objects exist, are propositions abstract objects? If not, what are there dimensions? If abstract objects exist, can they be physically contained within space, or must we then concede to the existence of a non-spatial realm which is transcendent of space? — TheGreatArcanum
Why must we understand language to understanding being? If language points to meaning, and being has meaning (in itself), is not language reducible to meaning and therefore being and not to words? What is meaning and how does it relate to the mind and world? — TheGreatArcanum
Meaning is the relationship between causes and their effects. Mind is as much a cause of things in the world as it is an effect of prior causes in the world. Words are scribbles on a page that were caused by some mind's intent to communicate. By reading words on a page (the effect) you can get at the cause - the idea that the writer intended to communicate. But humans are not necessary to establish this relationship between causes and their effects, or to point to causes with effects. Causes and effects do this as part of their very nature. The tree rings in a tree stump were not made by humans, but point to the age of the tree because of how the tree grows throughout the year. No humans are necessary for tree rings to point at the age of the tree, but humans are necessary to know that tree rings point at the age of the tree to be able to use tree rings to know the age of some tree.Words don't denote/refer. People do. — Manuel
If abstract objects exist, are propositions abstract objects? If not, what are there dimensions? If abstract objects exist, can they be physically contained within space, or must we then concede to the existence of a non-spatial realm which is transcendent of space? — TheGreatArcanum
is not language reducible to meaning and therefore being and not to words? — TheGreatArcanum
There is a basic form that can account for many specific cases in philosophy which is:Do abstract objects exist? If abstract objects exist, are propositions abstract objects? If not, what are there dimensions? If abstract objects exist, can they be physically contained within space, or must we then concede to the existence of a non-spatial realm which is transcendent of space? — TheGreatArcanum
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.