Cheerskep, Your response relies upon the 'meanings' of words (whatever that may be), and the material implications they make possible. You are presupposing what you deny.
On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 2:47 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Saul wrote: > > > We have associations - words are triggers > > > > Imago's response was: > > "This is metaphorical at best." > > Kate opined: > > " I agree with this-changing one word to another as Saul has doesn't add > any > information to the problem and doesn't help define it any either." > > Saul's metaphorical remark has its aptness if we think of it this way: A > trigger does nothing until it is pulled. The "pulling" is the hearing of > the > utterance (or reading of the scription) and the consequent processing of > what's heard. When we hear "Cleopatra" our receiving and processing > apparatus > immediately retrieves from our memory lots of Cleopatra-associated images > and > ideas. Each of us might agree to call these retrieved memories "the meaning > for me" of 'Cleopatra'. But notice that this usage of "meaning" is not > assuming there is a "THE meaning of" the term 'Cleopatra'. (Though > philosophers, > befuddled by the conviction that that names "mean", have long argued about > what "THE meaning of a name" could be. )
