Ingvar Johansson wrote:
> Waclaw Kusnierczyk schrieb:
>> I see that the problem of the simple statement which I posted here a few
>> days ago:
>>
>> [WK] Constrained expressivity does not mean that what you say about
>> >> the world is necessarily confused -- it is just a model which is much
>> >> more simple than the modeled reality.
>>
>> has given ground to an interesting discussion in which the most
>> honourable authorities participate.
>>
>> I'd like therefore to come back to the source of disagreement and try to
>> get a short answer to the following question:
>>
>> Q: Is it essentially wrong to say that a sentence about (a part of)
>> reality is a model of it?
>>
>
> In my opinion, this question is impossible to answer before you know
> what kind of use (realistic, fictional, or assumptive) the sentence is
> put to. If a sentence is used in the realistic sense, then one might on
> a meta-level say that it is a kind of proposed model of reality that
> might be true, truthlike, or false. On the ordinary level one simply
> talks about the world, but one may well move up onto a meta-level and
> talk about the relationship between the sentence and the world. (01)
So you have actually answered the question: if there are situations in
which it does make sense to say that a sentence about reality is a model
of it, then it is not *essentially* wrong to say that. It might have
been wrong under the interpretation Barry assigned to it (somewhat
mistakenly wrt. my intentions). (02)
vQ (03)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (04)
|