Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Bowser, Jul 6, 2018.
So you still ignor my post #169
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Post 169 simply refers to post 167. Which I addressed.
You are now simply trolling. I have met and exceeded my obligation to address you seriously.
State your case or stand a fool.
Yet you dance around my post #169 , why ?
Asked and answered. Several times now.
I am more than met my obligation. You are charged with rereading the thread. You will find, not only have I addressed your questions several times now, but I have pointed you to where I have addressed your questions several times now.
Further insistence that I am somehow responsible for doing your homework is shameless trolling.
But YOU know. Once again.
Exactly. Thus not inherent.
If it were inherent, then the definition of the word would be contained within the word. You would not need anything else to know the meaning.
But, since you need an external component - my intent - to know the meaning, then the meaning is not in the word, it is in me.
You're post is wrong. You yourself gave different definitions for "rock". Therefore "rock' has no inherent meaning. Dave gave different definitions for "space". Therefore "space" has no inherent meaning.
If I understand Dave correctly, he sees a common denominator in all the uses of a word that indicates a state of being. If we look deeper at each definition, we usually find a common theme, even as the descriptions may vary greatly.
I checked it. The oldest words in the dictionary generally also have the most applications in practice. Consider the words "home" and "food" and their many uses in compound words or situations. "Food" is not necessarily a vegetable. It has a deeper generic meaning of "nourishment", such as in "food for thought"
OTOH. the newest words, especially in the area of computing, have very specific meanings, with some notable exceptions.
"Interface" was once purely dedicated term in computing. Yet today it is used in many different contexts, but retaining it's fundamental meaning of; interface = connection
So there's both divergent and convergent evolution in language.
It seems so, it's the reverse of using synonyms with a fundamental meaning. It's also using one word to include and comply with all the synonyms.
p.s. this is also true in science and gets me often in trouble.
Take a word "Potential". Even in science it has many uses, because it satisfies a fundamental concept of "that which may become reality", and that's just about everything which physically can or has become reality of our Universe.....Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!.
That's why a boy can have the potential to become a doctor or a scientist.
One can say that the Higgs boson is an expression of Universal Potential.
I love that word; Potential; "That which may become Reality". How elegant is that??????
p.p.s. Bohm liked the word Potential and even distinguished it as "pure potential" the raw stuff and "implicate potential", the "implicate" being the image of an enfolded order which is to become unfolded in reality.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Separate names with a comma.