The Metaphysics of Meaning and the Symbolism of Language :: Philosophy Communication Essays

The Metaphysics of Meaning and the Symbolism of Language thither atomic number 18 no facts, only interpretations Nachlass Friedrich Nietzsche In this essay, I shall expound the nave view, or supposition, of symbolism, which assumes, or argues, that in the symbolic system of language thoughts are convey by speech, and that words have mean, thereof. I shall show that the nave possibility of symbolism is invalid, and offer an alternative view incorporating my own empirical theories of meaning and language. I shall also argue against the nave view of such a relation as expression in the context of a symbolic theory of language. I shall further assert that meaning can non be a plaza of words, or any linguistic symbol. In nave symbolism, expression is the relation connecting thoughts and words, allowing us to compile phrases such as, thoughts and their expressions, where their implies a possessive quality that thoughts and words share. Here, the words are possessed by the thoughts w ords belong to thoughts, and have a causal relation. It is statements such as these that I will pay philosophical attention to. I shall be considering whether such a relationship is possible, how it comes about, and the logical system of such a relation. I will show that there is no such causal relation, nor logically mutual dependence between thoughts and words. Further, I will argue it cannot be said, with any logical validity, that symbolism in language implies a possessive relation such as, thoughts and their words. Thoughts are not in the possession of words, for this implies an illogical causal relation. The term expression, and all its immix forms, is bogus in the nave position it plays between words and thoughts. There are thoughts, there are words, or symbols. However, the two are uncomplete logically related, nor mutually dependent. The conclusion of this essay will be the argument, logically and philosophically defended that the game of language we all share in align t o communicate and understand each other, is a guessing game. The thoughts of others cannot be cognise through language, only pointed to. Expressions are merely indicators of meaning. Understanding, in the generally accept sense, never happens. Finally, a piece of speculation into the theory of language development. often of our ability to understand and use language comes from the tools we attained in our formative years. One such tool was the copy-cat style of learning the empirical expressions.