|
hello organic born. Being reminded by your post that defining can also be confining if not confusing, "description" would have been a better word to have used rather than "definition" in my post above to which you have replied.
That the act of defining can--in some circumstances--be confining if not confusing should not, I think, mean abandoning the process of defining or rejecting definitions. I am pondering here,--thinking not aloud but in print-- that in circumstances when definition is used in the sense of a description arrived at by thought of that which is the product of thought, then no confusion or confinement need necessarily accompany such definition. In circumstances where a description is needed of that which is not the product of thought then perhaps we would be better advised to simply drop the term "definition" and use the term "description". ( As above) indicating that we recognise that our knowledge arrived at by thought may be insufficient to be definitive.
Bit clumsy all this, needs more work. It seems a bit pedantic. I am sure those with more ability will put it better. It is quite possible that, as is often the case, those with more ability have already done so--or rejected such pondering as rubbish.
It further occurs to me there is also one kind of in between circumstance which results from the use of words and terminology. For though it is the case that words and terminology are the product of thought, they are themselves simply conveyances of meaning, and may be attempts to convey meaning of that which is not the product of human thought.This does indeed present a dilemma.
In such circumstances perceiving certainties as stepping stones may be helpful. Good wishes. petex
|