Re: Guessing?

From: paul c <toledobysea_at_ac.ooyah>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 22:16:19 GMT
Message-ID: <TGRck.86439$gc5.29564@pd7urf2no>

JOG wrote:
> I get tired of these confusions concerning "meaning". There is no
> meaning in a proposition. None. Meaning exists in our heads and
> nowhere else. Logical propositions are purely syntactic, and RA is a
> purely mathematical formalism no different to geometry say.
> And anyone who tries to use the word "semantic" in some pseudo-
> technical fashion, as though the word makes any sense /whatsoever/,
> should be smacked round the head with a fish. A big sodding haddock
> maybe.

I'm with you. They seem to be over-loaded all over the place, 'meaning' especially here usually has over-loaded meaning! When it comes to implementations I think both words can usually be avoided. When talking about predicates and symbol manipulation, usually I try to remember to say "stands for" rather than "means", seems less murky to me. I'm not so sure about substituting for "semantic" but think that it pretty much always is used when talking about the effects that result from some language syntax or other, maybe "intention" would be as good. Haddock sounds fine to me since I prefer cod and salmon for eating. Received on Tue Jul 08 2008 - 17:16:19 CDT

Original text of this message