@Fil Albuquerque,
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
Dasein wrote:
Fil Albuquerque wrote:
Remember that 80´s film about a coca-cola bottle which fell off from an airplane in Africa and changed an entire culture in a tribe ? The damn bottle was everything for them but a bottle...function brings the object and is that who gives it meaning !
The damn bottle just fell from the plane. Individual members of the tribe provided meaning. For some people Coca-cola bottles don't mean anything, its just a bottle. For others it reminds them of the good old days and for some others it reminds them of the first girl they kissed. Meaning comes from who you are not the damn bottle. Are you
really trying to convince me that Coca-cola bottles have the ability to provide meaning?
Really! The only person you can fool is the one who is fooling himself.
Oh damn...
...a bottle of cola can be a thousand things and all of them must correspond to the property´s it contains in order to any idea which can correlate to it to be conceivable given functions rely on it...
...for instance a bottle of cola can be... say :
a blunt weapon
it can be a jar
it can be a flute for music
a tool for smashing potatoes nuts or whatever say a hammer and so on...
all these examples and innumerable more make together the ultra object that a bottle of cola contains in its property´s and that can be thought of when in relation...and if it is true that we see in it what we want and what we need, its also true, that we only can see, what is there to be seen in the first place...
What you call the properties of an object are all abstractions: its transparency, its characteristic shape, and so on. They can be separated from each other or from the object only by means of abstraction, and each one of these abstractions already has its meaning, which it also cannot explain. You are confusing these abstractions with a scientific explanation regarding how the brain assembles them in an object. However this happens, meaning is its
result rather then its
guiding plan, and this result is precisely the same as the object
as a whole. You may object that this would turn an object into different objects according to its particular meaning to different persons, which can be an objection only if you keep confusing the abstract properties of that object with its meaning or, which is the same, with that object itself. What is common to my bottle of Coke and yours is not the whole bottle, but rather its transparency, its characteristic shape, and so on. What all bottles of Coke have in common, regardless for whom, are these abstract properties, and hardly the whole bottle, which is its meaning, and so tends to be unique for each one of us.
