Empirical science is indeed validated by its pragmatic results in the real world. But Theoretical Science (philosophy) can only be validated if & when it produces practical specific real-world results. Unfortunately, that may be a long time coming. But in the meantime, the theory may be useful as a component of our general understanding of the world. Newton's solar system cosmology was our best theory, until Einstein came along and generalized it --- via math, not experiment --- to the whole universe. :smile:You may be right. I've spoken someone rejecting any form of rationality claiming that only strictly empirical science is valid. As if any of the empirical sciences could exist without the rational approach of logic as in math. — Tomseltje
Some people think Wittgenstein invalidated the concept of definitions, by noting how definitions vary depending on context. But that's all the more reason to specify your meaning in the current context, and not to just leave the meaning open to all interpretations. :smile:When definitions change at a certain point in time, there will by definition be multiple definitions in use as some people have picked up the new definition and others haven't (yet) — Tomseltje
But that's all the more reason to specify your meaning in the current context, and not to just leave the meaning open to all interpretations. — Gnomon
Unfortunately, relying on standard dictionary definitions ignores the distinction between Semantics (literal meaning) and Semiotics (emotional or contextual meaning). The science & philosophy of Semiotics became necessary in the 20th century, in part due to the proliferation of communication channels, and to the complex layering of subcultures. More recently, Kahneman & Tversky labeled a variety of ways that otherwise obvious meanings can be misinterpreted (e.g. availability heuristic), due to common errors in reasoning. That's especially true for Characterizing Labels.So I partly agree with you. I agree one should be clear on ones intend, and if asked for elaboration it should be provided, but I cannot account for all possible other interpretations of my words that are based on peoples ignorance on how the dictionary of the language they claim to use defines the word. They can ask me for clarification or look it up in the dictionary, or both. — Tomseltje
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.