Absolute truth?

hmmm...true meaning...ah, kk.

You aren't referring to "true meaning" you're referring to the specific definition in which has been defined by reality. Completely different, everyone has a different meaning behind each word, it's just that some people's meanings are more similar than others. The meaning can also be changed or altered based on the context or idea around it.

So, how many meanings are there in your last post? 100? 1-million? You lost me.

How many people read it?

Your guess is as good as mine. If five people read it, how many interpretations are there?

idk about interpretations, but there's only one meaning per person. There could be several different interpretations and understandings per person, but only one meaning...which is what we're talking about (since you were talking about "true meaning").

If they understand what your wrote to have different meanings, it's because they either don't understand English or because their thinking is off base - like yours. I'm otta here.

You're still confusing meaning with definitions. If you think all meanings are suppose to be the same, then you would also have to say that everyone is suppose to perceive things exactly the same and that we all have the same exact experiences. Meaning comes from our emotional connection to things as well as our recollection of past events concerning those things.

You're playing a 'word' game here. 'Meaning' cannot be confused with 'definitions' as they are both concepts, the only difference there is what we agree they 'point to'.

You are the one who either accepts or rejects what these words 'point to'. When you play the 'word game'(also what they're 'supposed' to point to) you are attempting to 'trick' someone else into agreeing with you.

Also, 'meaning' does not come from any kind of 'connection'. What you call 'meaning' is you bringing 'you' to the party. It's what you bring to the 'world'.

I love you William!!

You still make absolutely no sense and are completely contradictory as if you don't even understand the basic principles of language.

Language is actually all about that "word game" and the technical term for that "word game" is called Semantics. Semantics focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for or their denotata. Now Linguistic semantics specifically, is the study of meaning that is used by humans to express themselves through language...which is what we are doing here.

Meaning and definitions 'can' be confused regardless of them only being concepts, they are separate, individual concepts in which some people believe to be synonyms of each other when they actually are not. The process in which we use in attempting to agree on their definitions is semantics which is what you also referred to as "tricking" someone into agreeing with you which is what it's all about.

Meaning is created from our connection with the world around us. It comes from our understanding, how we perceive things, our experiences, etc. Now I can see how understanding and definitions can be confused. The difference between a definition and an understanding is basically what a word represents in general as opposed to our individual comprehension of it.

Well first off I will give a sarcastic 'applause' for you 'knowledge' of semantics.(That's what you were looking for, wasn't it?)

All the rest of your post is just regurgitation, it's basically like a kindergarten recital and you do it because the 'audience' is persistent in you winning 'first prize'.

So long as you continue to re-present your 'self' as merely a representation, then that's all you'll be.

That's not what I'm looking for actually, and to actually correct you, I really just have a knowledge of the internet and google. I had a decent knowledge of it before hand but I like to double check things to make sure that what I state is accurate. I'll ignore the ignorace of your second sentence but I will adress the stupidity of the last sentence. It seems as if you don't realize that since this is a forum it's entirely about the representation of yourself. That's all that can be potrayed and explained since all there is to go on is just simple words and sentences. There's no "you" here, there are only your words, I'm also well aware that this is all that I will be ON HERE. If you think that I'm wrong and that this is just more "regurgitation", then prove me wrong and present your "self" as more than a representation.

I'm not talking about this forum!!!

'Your' words reflect 'knowing', or lack-thereof.

Sometimes definitions needs interpetation too.
People with low lix count will usually have a very poor interpetation of simple defitions.

Way to inform him Hex, I'm sure he needed that and is grateful for your contribution.

I don't think you really understand all of what you're saying or are just being stupid. You say that you aren't talking about this forum, which is obvious, but what you fail to realize is that's all that is between us so that's all you see. All that you know about me are my words and how I represent myself though them on the various topics that I comment on. You stated that if I continue to re-present my "self" as merely a representation, then that's all I'll be. That of course is all that I will be on here and to you and everyone else. You do not know who I am and you really don't know anything about me at all. The only thing that you DO know, are what my views are on this topic, or any other topic that you view that I have commented on. You say that you aren't talking about the forum, which is obvious. I understood well that you were actually stating a very personal insult against the entire nature of my "being". I was merely commenting that you are a complete idiot to base such a bold insult on someone you know relatively nothing about. If you also factor in your dumbass twist idea in this as well with your belief that language is nothing, then you actually know absolutely nothing about me so it only furthers your stupidity on this.

I may not have stated this clearly enough but I don't believe that I went into any specifics with it but all definitions are already interpreted by each individual person. How those words are defined is just the generalized point of what it represents for most people. If I were to say "water" a great deal of understandings, and interpretations branch off from that. When I say "water" you could think of it from a chemistry stand point of H2O or you can think of a bottle of water, or a river, etc. This is why we use context and generally the more context that you use, the greater the understanding about something is. Unless you already have a level of understanding with a person then you sort of skip a lot of those unnecesary steps and less context is needed.

Speaking in terms of concepts or theories indicates that you still think there are 'things' that exist outside of you that have 'meaning' and can either be understood or not.

Not even for a split second do you realize that you are merely 'reporting' on the reflection of your projection.

You are the projector, not the projection.

Do you exist? If you do then you would be a "thing" outside of me. Now this is where you also get confused, understanding has very little to do with meaning. Anything that we experience, regardless of whether we understand it or not, has meaning.

I can somewhat see where you're going with this, but it's very close minded and this is may be where our problems branch from. Of course we are the "projector" but we aren't reporting on the "reflection of our projections" we are reporting on the "projections" of others, our "projections" sort of intertwine with each other. In this case our "projections" are our words and they intertwine through this discussion. Now conventions (such as language) are just immaterial tools to assist us in relating to each other and understanding the world around us. They of course aren't "things" and they don't really "exist", they are just representations of things in order to attempt to create understanding and help convey ideas and event between each other.