Are Philosophers lost in the clouds?

guigus wrote:

Jebediah wrote:

jeeprs wrote:

added to which, there are many terms, especially in philosophy, which you can't simply define. 'Truth' is a case in point. Every attempt I see to 'define truth' ends up in tautology or, more likely, complete incoherence and waffle. It's easy to define words that have a particular meaning, the more particular, the easier. But many of the overarching concerns of philosophy have a vast domain of meaning, and saying 'what is your definition of truth' (or God, or Consciousness, or Being, or [insert term here]) is an exercise in futility.

The meaning of these words can be usefully elicited in conversation about matters of value. Then there are times when you can see what they mean. This is why ultimately philosophy has to mean something to you, it has to count for something, you have to have some skin in the game, as the saying has it. Otherwise it's just hot air.

Doesn't the definition of truth come from the way it's used? If you can't define it then I don't see how you can use it.

I don't think it's that these words have a vast domain of meaning that we can't grasp, but rather that people think they can make up their own definitions.

And I think that people say a word has no definition simply because they don't want to discuss their own definition of it.

If anyone were to tell me that a word had no definition, I would suggest he quickly go to a dictionary and look up the definition of the word he said had no definition. All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up. Unless the word had a definition, it would not be a word, but rather a sound or a mark.

Quote:

All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up.

Indeed. And as we all have dictionaries, it is a wonder that any discussion is necessary, isn't it?

Dear Jeeprs, can u tell kenneth we are not all using just a dictionary. Some people actually make definitions.

jeeprs wrote:

Quote:

All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up.

Indeed. And as we all have dictionaries, it is a wonder that any discussion is necessary, isn't it?

I wouldn't be that ironic, but you are correct. Dictionary definitions should never be forgotten, but a philosopher cannot simply take a dictionary definition for the meaning of any word: at leas he has to critically examine that meaning.

Quote:

All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up.

Indeed. And as we all have dictionaries, it is a wonder that any discussion is necessary, isn't it?

jeeprs wrote:

Quote:

All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up.

Indeed. And as we all have dictionaries, it is a wonder that any discussion is necessary, isn't it?

I own a lot of dictionaries, and often find they are a good place to begin a search for a definition, but are a terrible place to end... I am certain too, that my dictionaries are are defective... For example; I have never found love in the dictionary... Perhaps I am looking for it in all the wrong places...

Quote:

All English words have meanings, and their meanings are given in their definitions, which anyone can easily look up.

Indeed. And as we all have dictionaries, it is a wonder that any discussion is necessary, isn't it?

Dear Jeeprs, can u tell kenneth we are not all using just a dictionary. Some people actually make definitions.

Pepijn Sweep wrote:

Dear Jeeprs, can u tell kenneth we are not all using just a dictionary. Some people actually make definitions.

What makes anyone think that if someone invents a meaning for a word, it has any importance? Children invent meanings all the time, and then they are corrected, and shown that the meaning they think the word has is not its actual meaning. If people were the sole authorities on the meanings of the words they use, how could they use words wrongly, and how could they be corrected. Answer, they cannot. It is not up to any individual what the meaning of a word is. Why should it be. What authority would he have in that regard? And why, when there is a dispute about the meaning of a word, do we settle the dispute by consulting a dictionary? Why don't we simply argue that since I have decided to use the word in that way, that is the meaning of the word. Compare it with spelling. There is a right and a wrong way to spell a word, and to settle disputes about whether, for instance, the word "weird" should be spelled that way, or whether it should be spelled "wierd", we consult the dictionary. Wherever, I wonder, did you get the idea that it is you (individually) who can decide what a word means?

kennethamy wrote:

Pepijn Sweep wrote:

Dear Jeeprs, can u tell kenneth we are not all using just a dictionary. Some people actually make definitions.

What makes anyone think that if someone invents a meaning for a word, it has any importance? Children invent meanings all the time, and then they are corrected, and shown that the meaning they think the word has is not its actual meaning. If people were the sole authorities on the meanings of the words they use, how could they use words wrongly, and how could they be corrected. Answer, they cannot. It is not up to any individual what the meaning of a word is. Why should it be. What authority would he have in that regard? And why, when there is a dispute about the meaning of a word, do we settle the dispute by consulting a dictionary? Why don't we simply argue that since I have decided to use the word in that way, that is the meaning of the word. Compare it with spelling. There is a right and a wrong way to spell a word, and to settle disputes about whether, for instance, the word "weird" should be spelled that way, or whether it should be spelled "wierd", we consult the dictionary. Wherever, I wonder, did you get the idea that it is you (individually) who can decide what a word means?

That is not the problem... Politicians, and businessmen twist the defintions of word till all the good squeezes out of them, and they become all but useless for the communication of meaning...

Look up tragedy in the dictionary... Does it not seem obscene when some spokesperson for some government talks about dropping a bomb or two that destroys an apartment complex full of women and children and calls it a tragedy??? It is not double speak, or newspeak... There is no official program to destroy the ability of the language to convey a common meaning; but there is an effort to use words as a canoeist uses a paddle, as a rudder, and means to a particular end... It is not a common end, and it is not for all our benefit that the rich and the powerful destoy our ability to communicate... That is the very process by which they have their success... They rob all our forms of meaning and turn them into cash without considering that to defend ourselves from the enemies they make, that we may have to speak to each other, and not with word already loaded with innuendo, and hyperbole...

If I would say "KennethAmy" is lost, would thât not make him a philosopher ?

So my thoughts are not at RanDom ? Just for the sake of the argument at hand...

I do not discuss bank-accounts on internet. Are U Phishing ?