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
—