Shall I judge the either/or scenario law-of-excluded middle you present against the inherent limitations of language to end up with a vagueness of meaning that all eventually fall into and render communication difficult? — It’s always mistruths, particularly when pretending to state truths === I don’t know what truth is and have abandoned its search decades ago. I seek reasonableness which is always vague at the edges and often in the bulk as well, although I strive for as much precision as I can given the inherent limitations — i believe that precision is a nice myth — “Reasonableness” is linked to convincing power / rhetoric, which is inherent in communication and its effectiveness. — Concepts do not exist without people communicating them and the boundaries of concepts are assigned by the communicators and are accepted or rejected on a social / community basis. Dictionaries reflect usage and are descriptive although they CAN be used prescriptively but only as a negotiation point: “do we agree this is the common meaning?” and not as some kind of absolute platonic objectivity —

Shall I judge the either/or scenario law-of-excluded middle you present against the inherent limitations of language to end up with a vagueness of meaning that all eventually fall into and render communication difficult?

It’s always mistruths, particularly when pretending to state truths
===
I don’t know what truth is and have abandoned its search decades ago.
I seek reasonableness which is always vague at the edges and often in the bulk as well, although I strive for as much precision as I can given the inherent limitations

i believe that precision is a nice myth

“Reasonableness” is linked to convincing power / rhetoric, which is inherent in communication and its effectiveness.

Concepts do not exist without people communicating them and the boundaries of concepts are assigned by the communicators and are accepted or rejected on a social / community basis.
Dictionaries reflect usage and are descriptive although they CAN be used prescriptively but only as a negotiation point: “do we agree this is the common meaning?” and not as some kind of absolute platonic objectivity

[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


× nine = 45

Leave a Reply