Steven Brust wrote: > > Oh, how splendid! An argument! > Arguments are good! Though I think that the term argument is interpreted incorrectly :) > > But let us pass on to language. Can it simply be dismissed as > "subjective?" I'm not sure. My inclination is to say no. Language has > at least two important uses--first, it is how we think, second, it is > how we communicate our thoughts. > Except of course when language is used as an aethetic artifact. Then the meaning can become entirly subjective. > Let us consider the second. The easiest two examples to illustrate my > point would be mathematics and music. Let us consider mathematics. It > is obviously a language--that is, a coherent system of symbols. <PEDANT> I would contend that mathematics is more like a whole heap of languages, being as the grammers are not particualy consistant:) eg 2+3= is the same as 23+= just using a different notation </PEDANT> > Is > there any objective truth to the proposition that 2+3=5? Well, sure, at > least insofar as if I pile up two books, add another three to the pile, > I will have five books in the pile. Now, two individuals can agree > that, amongst themselves, they will use the symbol "4" to represent > three. Among the two of them, that would work, so I guess in that sense > language could be considered subjective. But if they want to > communicate with the rest of the world, they really ought to agree about > what symbols mean what. > Unfortunalty this is often not the case, often understanding of symbols is ambigous, hence we have lawyers. > > As for English, well, consider that you and I pretty much agree, at > least in general, on what "subjective" means, and that, if we didn't, > we'd be unable to have this delightful discussion. While it is clear > that not all words in English have exact, precise meanings in which all > nuances are completely understood and agreed upon by everyone, there are > two things I believe-- > 1) The more any given group agrees on the meaning of a word, the better > they are able to exchange ideas. > 2) The more we have words available that make clear, nice distinctions, > the more precisely, elegantly, and, ultimately, creatively we are able > to think. > I find written english to be far more subjective than spoken english mainly cause the "voice" and context of the symbol is not always apparent, online this is compensated for by the use of emoticons for instance. OK time for logical argument. Can ambiguosity exist in a statement. Yes, for example consider the following statement "In my opinion, you will be very fortunate to get this person to work for you." This statement has two distict and contradictory meanings, hence it is up to the reader to interpret. If the reader is intrepreting a statement, does that not mean, by definition, that the statement is subjective? There are more examples of this kind at: http://www.vuse.vanderbilt.edu/~jgray/funny.html#LIAR So is it time to start talking about "relative truths" and post-modernism yet? On the other hand, as my wife says "Action is not a verb." Andrew.