To: | "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
---|---|
From: | Steven Ericsson-Zenith <steven@xxxxxxx> |
Date: | Sat, 3 May 2014 18:39:27 -0700 |
Message-id: | <CAAyxA7vAO=fL6LL6Nx0gaccRJVuMdyPqPR_cZ_eHaRVz+Pvwzw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
It's not that words hold any intrinsic "meaning," it is that words produce a range of biophysical behaviors. It is these behaviors, and by them their "grounding," that may rightly be described as "meaning."
Working from conventional dictionaries is futile, they are the record of usage. Dictionaries are independent of epistemology, there is no requirement that dictionaries be consistent (produce the same effects).
A minimum core set of ideas has little to do with language and has much more to do with mathematics. Regards, Steven -- Steven Ericsson-Zenith
Institute for Advanced Science & Engineering On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 6:16 PM, joel luis carbonera <joelcarbonera@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
_________________________________________________________________ Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/ Config Subscr: 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 join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J (01) |
Previous by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] English number of words/concepts that cannot be composed of others, joel luis carbonera |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [ontolog-forum] English number of words/concepts that cannot be composed of others, Patrick Cassidy |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [ontolog-forum] English number of words/concepts that cannot be composed of others, joel luis carbonera |
Next by Thread: | [ontolog-forum] (no subject), Sweet Jr., William H |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |