The defeat of objectivist and absolute doctrines does not leave us with nothing. To think that way is to give far too much credit to what has been undermined. There is at least one view in the world, yours.
In a sense there is nothing absolute, but there are indicative definitions, that is, "pointing and naming". In the most general case we point at all our perceptions, and we name them "perceptions". These include not only so called sense perceptions, but any perception of mood, of a bodily state, of an urge or even the perception of a memory, allway played out in time. All reason starts with the bodily action, not merely metaphorically, indicating something and naming it. The rational for the classifications that are being made comes later, perhaps as a verbal description of the alleged boundary line.
Since I see it as information processing, I prefer the verbal description be of the criteria, a set of rules for placing objects in a set, as if sequentially, one candidate, or group of candidates, at a time. Everything follows from this, and every abstract (intensional or connotative) meaning is drawn from statements about patterns of relationship. At the physical bottom, we have measurement of mass, extent, or time done always in comparison with a robust object, so the comparison is consistent at least on one side.
No comments:
Post a Comment