Home | Community | Message Board

Cannabis Seeds UK
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
OfflineGrapefruit
Freak in the forest
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 5,744
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. * 1
    #26617517 - 04/21/20 11:19 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

How do you see the interplay between these two very different styles of expression?

Myself I like to think I have a reasonably balanced use of the two. Sometimes I go for using words in a more rigid and exacting manner, and sometimes I like to use them in more abstract senses. Although I do tend toward using terms more rigidly as a whole in comparison to most, every once in a while I do like to break out of that box and come in with something a little more vague and less absolute, and yet perhaps useful . It seems that approach rquires a great deal of creativity to create that kind of poetical philosophical expression. And so I fall toward the former, but try to keep it nuanced and not tend towards concretism.

With both styles I favour balanced perspectives over the sure and righteous ones.

Seems to me this is one of the greatest dichotomies in philosophy as an approach to wisdom and truth. I wouldn't suggest that one is right and one wrong but one or the other may work better for others depending on the individual.

So the question is; how do you fall in your vernacular use of language. Do you try to use words loosely with an almost mystical (bad word but it serves the purpose here) absract, poetical bent. Or do you prefer the rigid and analytical approach to iron out inconsistencies in thought and superstition. And why?


Edited by Grapefruit (04/21/20 11:42 AM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleYellow Pants
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc: Flag
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Grapefruit]
    #26617526 - 04/21/20 11:28 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

This is a good question.  And idk.  Some philosophers (kierkegaard) was poetic and very abstract in the use of the word yet by this very same approach captured insights that couldn’t be captured with a more concrete approach. 

I think it’s one thing to look at the material world and use words that unmistakably represent the things that can be seen.  But existentially there are no “real” things in that domain so the words must become abstractions.  I’m not entirely sure how I personally operate in this but it’s a good point.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,829
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Yellow Pants]
    #26617802 - 04/21/20 01:23 PM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Re: grapefruit

In science, popularizers are forced to use metaphors & looser terms. Just try and read a technical science paper ! Or one that requires advanced mathematics. IMO

In the case of metaphysics it is specifically pointed out that terms like "Tao" & "Nirvana" cannot really be defined, or explained - only hinted at. And that to a lesser (?) extent this applies to all direct experience. No description can let another (who has not tasted a banana) know what a banana actually tastes like - thus in a sense all words are inadequate. IMO

However much confusion is often caused in discussion, when both parties have not defined their terms. IMO


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,704
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: laughingdog]
    #26617832 - 04/21/20 01:37 PM (3 years, 9 months ago)

popularizers love to start headlines with the term "Scientists" and have license to append any sequence of sensational verbiage to that.

popularizers are better than conspiracy writers but not by much, kind of like the police and thugs, relatively close mentalities.

sorry this is supposed to be about fortified vernaculars - my bad.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleThe Blind Ass
Bodhi
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 08/16/16
Posts: 26,731
Loc: The Primordial Mind
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: redgreenvines] * 1
    #26617835 - 04/21/20 01:38 PM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Link to video in dispute?


--------------------
Give me Liberty caps -or- give me Death caps


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleYellow Pants
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc: Flag
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: laughingdog]
    #26621905 - 04/23/20 09:35 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

laughingdog said:
Re: grapefruit

In science, popularizers are forced to use metaphors & looser terms. Just try and read a technical science paper ! Or one that requires advanced mathematics. IMO

In the case of metaphysics it is specifically pointed out that terms like "Tao" & "Nirvana" cannot really be defined, or explained - only hinted at. And that to a lesser (?) extent this applies to all direct experience. No description can let another (who has not tasted a banana) know what a banana actually tastes like - thus in a sense all words are inadequate. IMO

However much confusion is often caused in discussion, when both parties have not defined their terms. IMO




What about an emotion or a thought?  The imagination can’t be traced in the material world.  And electrical circuits flowing through a lump of white tissue doesn’t seem to quite get it.  Just what is going on there.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,704
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Yellow Pants]
    #26622137 - 04/23/20 11:34 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

did you ask how the brain works?

This is not ratified science, but I believe we will find that sensory induced electrical field wave propagation in the cortex makes interference which activates multibranched neurons subsequently creating additional electrical field waves and new interference …

while repetition or sustained pulse train firing of the same group of neurons increases the synapse strength at the termini of multibranched neurons when they connect to active neuron bodies comprising parts of the engrammatic "image". (this is how short term memory formation occurs.)

I am using "image" to map to any pattern of excitation visual, auditory, body, memory, etc.

stimulating part of a remembered image cluster of neurons encourages the recollection of the rest of the related image. (associative recollection AKA linkage)

It's something like that.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblelaughingdog
Stranger
 User Gallery
Registered: 03/14/04
Posts: 4,829
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Yellow Pants]
    #26622146 - 04/23/20 11:37 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Yellow Pants said:
Quote:

laughingdog said:
Re: grapefruit

In science, popularizers are forced to use metaphors & looser terms. Just try and read a technical science paper ! Or one that requires advanced mathematics. IMO

In the case of metaphysics it is specifically pointed out that terms like "Tao" & "Nirvana" cannot really be defined, or explained - only hinted at. And that to a lesser (?) extent this applies to all direct experience. No description can let another (who has not tasted a banana) know what a banana actually tastes like - thus in a sense all words are inadequate. IMO

However much confusion is often caused in discussion, when both parties have not defined their terms. IMO




What about an emotion or a thought?  The imagination can’t be traced in the material world.  And electrical circuits flowing through a lump of white tissue doesn’t seem to quite get it.  Just what is going on there.




.    It is not clear to me, what your point is, let alone how it relates to the the fact that we all use different degrees of accuracy according to the context, which is both well known and obvious. It is also well known that that all language is approximate and that it is not the same as direct sensory experience. Seems when people argue about concepts they may have lost sight of this.
.    People who burn flags, and those who physically attack them for doing so, seem to be an example of folks mistaking symbols for "reality"

.    In less extreme situations "... confusion is often caused in discussion, when both parties have not defined their terms." Also a well known point.

.    So all I did was state some facts that relate to the use of concepts, and how they relate to context.  No claim to a comprehensive theory of anything was made.

.  Even this is nothing new, there is an idiom "Not to see the forest for the trees". Perhaps not often pointed out (or ever? in relation to this phrase or context, but otherwise known in some contexts) is that the reverse is also true:'Not to see the trees for the forest'. What is necessary is to see BOTH detail and context.


.  So again....    So all I did was state some facts that relate to the use of concepts, and how they relate to context. No claim to a comprehensive theory of anything was made. 
.  Only an attempt to relate to the OP's question was attempted. It would seem you are welcome to form your own theories or your own answer to him, if you  should so wish.

.    In Regards to the OP's question: "So the question is; how do you fall in your vernacular use of language. Do you try to use words loosely with an almost mystical (bad word but it serves the purpose here) absract, poetical bent. Or do you prefer the rigid and analytical approach to iron out inconsistencies in thought and superstition. And why?"

.    Any look at the methods of indirect hypnosis will show frequent use of purposely vague language, and of metaphor. There is much free info as regards this on the web.
Again the context is very  important.
.    On the contrary. A look at the methods of "Clean Language" will show frequent use of echoing  language,precisely There is much free info as regards this on the web.
Again context and intent are vital.


Edited by laughingdog (04/23/20 01:26 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleYellow Pants
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/14/17
Posts: 1,386
Loc: Flag
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: laughingdog]
    #26622373 - 04/23/20 01:31 PM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Well I suppose there’s a difference between a banana and say confusion.  In my confusion I have no anchor to the material world so my vernacular must be abstract to compensate.  But a banana is concrete and so on.  Maybe I shouldn’t of quoted you, my bad.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinethealienthatategod
retrovertigo
Female

Registered: 10/10/17
Posts: 2,658
Last seen: 2 days, 21 hours
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Yellow Pants]
    #26626190 - 04/25/20 03:33 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

i have never neared thinking about loose or rigid architectures for my words.

i don't think the actual specific words matter, what matters is that i attribute to your words the meaning that you intend for them to bear.

in my capacity to make sense of things, i just hope that my words have some meaning at all.

do you think we translate other humans words, in the way we want our own words understood?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleShr00mEater
Strange
Male

Registered: 10/17/18
Posts: 985
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: thealienthatategod]
    #26626218 - 04/25/20 04:07 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Cheese beans tell more narcs to fell purposeful times. Many torques sold field capacity hunger. People drop spilt temporary traps, for testing land taming first. A dry feather helps shake the dogs career.



I don’t really think I understand what the main idea in this discussion is actually.
But, there ya go, my attempt to show how loose language and personal definitions are fine, so long as you don’t mind being misunderstood and possibly thought to be insane.

If I am in an argument, I will tighten up my language and demand such from others; but, in general speech, I am for creative liberty.

I do notice, some people aim for abstraction in arguments. But, I think that’s a cheap trick, rather than a preference for certain types of language.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinethealienthatategod
retrovertigo
Female

Registered: 10/10/17
Posts: 2,658
Last seen: 2 days, 21 hours
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Shr00mEater]
    #26626341 - 04/25/20 06:20 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

we can never know uncertainty, but we can always explore fractured possibilities.

if language is filled with doubt and uncertainty, can it also be rigidly defined?  as in do both of the things OP asked at the same time.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,704
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Shr00mEater]
    #26626363 - 04/25/20 06:34 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

sometimes I get so tight with my words that my point shrinks into a black hole: the gravity of which, being relentless, (if you get close to the topic,) should at least be a warning to other space cadets.


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinethealienthatategod
retrovertigo
Female

Registered: 10/10/17
Posts: 2,658
Last seen: 2 days, 21 hours
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: redgreenvines]
    #26628736 - 04/26/20 03:19 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

i just thought those were rabbit holes


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleredgreenvines
irregular verb
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/08/04
Posts: 37,704
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: thealienthatategod]
    #26628940 - 04/26/20 06:04 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

only true cosmic bunnies can emerge from a black hole


--------------------
:confused: _ :brainfart:🧠  _ :finger:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGrapefruit
Freak in the forest
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 5,744
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: laughingdog]
    #26633137 - 04/27/20 09:52 PM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

laughingdog said:
Re: grapefruit

In science, popularizers are forced to use metaphors & looser terms. Just try and read a technical science paper ! Or one that requires advanced mathematics. IMO

In the case of metaphysics it is specifically pointed out that terms like "Tao" & "Nirvana" cannot really be defined, or explained - only hinted at. And that to a lesser (?) extent this applies to all direct experience. No description can let another (who has not tasted a banana) know what a banana actually tastes like - thus in a sense all words are inadequate. IMO

However much confusion is often caused in discussion, when both parties have not defined their terms. IMO




Writing people like Nietszche or any of the ancient greek philosophers down as popularisers might be correct, but these are still figures leagues ahead of most people writing philosophy. Some just like the poetic format, they want to convey something in a way that your soul understands before your intellect I would say. It's like music, but even those using rigid terms can be very musical, like for example Bach, or I might say Max Cooper if you were familiar with the modern Electronic music scene. In terms of philosophers we might put into this category say schopenhauer and hume, or even viveknanda if you'd like a little eastern spice. I think the analogy works somewhat, strong intellect can have it's own passion, power, and beauty. Modern academic papers (probably, I'm not that well read there just guessing) often have next to nothing to do with what I would call strong philosophy, a strong philosophy is a force unto itself.


--------------------
Little left in the way of energy; or the way of love, yet happy to entertain myself playing mental games with the rest of you freaks until the rivers run backwards. 

"Chat your fraff
Chat your fraff
Just chat your fraff
Chat your fraff"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,949
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Grapefruit] * 1
    #26633516 - 04/28/20 03:27 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

I think that learning about the different fields of Ecology can teach people a great deal about meaning in the natural world.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleThe Blind Ass
Bodhi
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 08/16/16
Posts: 26,731
Loc: The Primordial Mind
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: sudly]
    #26633524 - 04/28/20 03:32 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Amen sudz.


--------------------
Give me Liberty caps -or- give me Death caps


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineGrapefruit
Freak in the forest
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/09/08
Posts: 5,744
Last seen: 3 years, 1 month
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: sudly]
    #26633563 - 04/28/20 04:10 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

sudly said:
I think that learning about the different fields of Ecology can teach people a great deal about meaning in the natural world.




Indeed, turns out so can reading some comic books and eating a bowl of cereal. Chopping wood and carrying water. Many means and ways. :awesome:


--------------------
Little left in the way of energy; or the way of love, yet happy to entertain myself playing mental games with the rest of you freaks until the rivers run backwards. 

"Chat your fraff
Chat your fraff
Just chat your fraff
Chat your fraff"


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblesudly
Darwin's stagger

Registered: 01/05/15
Posts: 10,949
Re: Loose vs Rigid vernaculars in philosophy and semantics. [Re: Grapefruit]
    #26633583 - 04/28/20 04:48 AM (3 years, 9 months ago)

Reading about ecosystems sure, but I don't think cereal helps in environmental appreciation, unless perhaps the agricultural processes and wheat processing that went in to making them, but that is rather industrial.


--------------------
I am whatever Darwin needs me to be.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Bad Philosophy Is Inconsistent
( 1 2 3 4 all )
SkorpivoMusterion 8,041 72 02/16/06 07:20 PM
by SkorpivoMusterion
* A philosophy degree?
( 1 2 3 all )
rogue_pixie 7,407 57 11/30/04 05:05 AM
by rogue_pixie
* Eastern philosophies...
( 1 2 3 4 all )
UnenlightenedOne 8,105 66 02/29/16 07:09 PM
by MarkostheGnostic
* science, religion, and philosophy Huehuecoyotl 1,622 15 01/28/05 10:05 AM
by Droz
* How many of you are actually philosophy majors?
( 1 2 all )
spud 3,350 24 04/25/07 07:50 AM
by fireworks_god
* My Personal Philosophy soylent_green 989 1 01/28/07 11:48 AM
by redgreenvines
* Absolute Truth Revistited (First Philosophy)
( 1 2 3 all )
shroomydan 4,215 44 04/30/05 11:29 PM
by Psychoactive1984
* In the vernacular, youbreakyoubuy 1,585 18 01/31/10 09:01 AM
by mescalinician

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
808 topic views. 1 members, 4 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.028 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 14 queries.