The Analysis Paradox: Philosophy Forums

Philosophy Forums » Metaphysics and Epistemology » The Analysis Paradox » The Analysis Paradox

The Analysis Paradox

TecnoTut
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 09, 2002
Location: Florida
Total Topics: 192
Total Posts: 4520

Posted 09/29/04 - 05:46 AM:	#1
The following tries to show that it is impossible for ana analysis of meaning to be informative for one who already understands the meaning. Consider: "An F is a G" (e.g. "a cat is a feline animal") gives a correct analysis of the meaning "F" only if "G" means the same as "F"; but then anayone who already understands both meanings must already know what the sentence says. Indeed, that will be the same as what the trivial "As F is an F" says, since replacing one expression by another with the same meaning should preserve what the sentence says. The conclusion that "An F is a G" cannot be informative (for one who already understands all its terms) is paradoxical only for cases where "G" is not only synonymous with but more complex than "F" in such a way as to give an analysis of "F" ("a first cousin is an offspring of a parent's sibling" gives an analysis, but "A dad is a father" does not and could not be informative for one who already knows the meaning of all its words). However, the paradox seems to fail to distinguish between different sorts of knowledge. Encountering for the first time (and understanding) a correct analysis of a meaning one already grasps brings one from merely tacit to explicit knowledge of its truth. One sees that it does caputre the meaning and thereby sees a way of articulating the meaning one had not thought of before.
He that dies pays all debts - Shakespeare's Stephano from The Tempest Truth is its own measure - Spinoza, Ethics IIp43s Those who deny [Aristotle's] first principle should be flogged or burned until they admit that it is not the same thing to be burned and not burned, or whipped and not whipped. - Ibn Sina (Avicenna)

wuliheron
Tenured Poster

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Jun 02, 2003
Location: Newport News, Va
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 3157

Posted 09/29/04 - 08:33 AM:	#2
Implicit and explicit meaning are both utterly dependent upon context because words only have demonstrable meaning according to their function in a given context. If I say I must visit the kitty litter box while walking into a public bathroom, the implicit meaning is I have to go to the bathroom. This, despite the fact that it is not a commonly used expression. Why? Because language is a creative process rather than a mere mechanical one.

muxol
yuletide

Usergroup: Members
Joined: Dec 07, 2003
Total Topics: 1
Total Posts: 1861

Posted 09/30/04 - 01:04 AM:	#3
the "paradox" (if we must call it that) assumes that one know absolutely everything about a particular word and the all the relations entailed therein. perhaps i know what hesperus is and i know what phosphorus is. but i only learned these words by observed cases at, of course, different tmes of the day. and perhaps i don't know what venus is so i never learned that hesperus is venus and phosophorus is venus. so i don't know that these words actually designate one and the same object until somebody tells me. must i know everything about everything before i'm said to know what a single word means? no.

c
Assistant Professor

Usergroup: Sponsors
Joined: Jul 10, 2004
Location: Sweden
Total Topics: 10
Total Posts: 342

Posted 10/01/04 - 08:48 AM:	#4
'is a' does not equal 'is' the previous simply mean that it is one of where the later that they are equal, I made a similar topic here: http://forums.philosophyforums.com/showthread.php?t=11350

You don't have permission to post.

Please login or register.