Frances to Cheerskep and others... 

Understood and agreed so will try to get at his definition of
meaning; but even if his meaning of a sign is deemed an objective
entity in the outer world, then his theory might still be good as
a "special" semantic theory of say formalism or materialism or
relativism or realism, and thus worthy of some study, albeit
limited to a particular circle of linguistic and epistemic
interest. 

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 12:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Polanyi's theory of Knowledge

 

Frances or Chris, you could do us all a good turn to see if in
the book he 

provies a defintion of 'meanng' -- i.e what HE HAS IN MIND with
the word. If he 

believes that "meaning" is somehow a mind-independent entity
"corresponding" to 

something like a universal notion, or even to just a word, that
will save us 

much time. 

Reply via email to