Lessons in Conventional Language

Magnus wrote:

However, there is one super-tiny but super-important thing that you fail to grasp and that is that the word "one" implies no finitude by definition.

Satyr wrote:

So it is neither finite nor infinite.

Let's try one more time.
This time using a slightly different approach.

The set of all phenomena that can be represented by the word "one" contains phenomena that is finite just as much as phenomena that is infinite.

This set is precisely the meaning of the word "one".
(As I said earlier, the meaning of a symbol is the set of all phenomena that can be represented by that symbol.)

This means the word "one" can be used to represent physical objects that are infinite just as much as physical objects that are finite.

When I say that the word "one" implies no finitude what I mean is that you cannot logically deduce that something is finite just because it is one thing.

If you know that someone is a bachelor you can logically deduce that he's unmarried but you cannot logically deduce the color of his skin nor his position in space and time.

So, if the word "one" is defined in such a way that it implies neither finitude nor infinitude, there is no logical contradiction when you say something like "a physical object that is infinitely divisible".

The problem occurs when you define the word "one" in a different way, narrowly, as logically implying either finitude or infinitude. That's when you run into a logical contradiction.

And that's what you're doing.

"Bachelor" -  human concept.

Name one object that it infinite.

I am not defining "one" at all. I am asking you to define it.
My opinions do not matter.
This is your lesson...on conventional thinking.

One is now a "symbol".
What is a symbol?

Is the word "human" literally a human?
What is the word?

Quote :

"Bachelor" -  human concept.

Yes, it is a word referring to a concept. Both are human inventions.

However, that does not mean that bachelors do not exist.
After all, we all know they do.
(You too know it just as well.)

What does it mean to say that "X exists"?

It means that there is a phenomenon out there in the real world that can be represented by the symbol X.

So what does it mean to say that bachelors exist?

It means that there is a phenomenon out there in the real world that can be represented by the word "bachelor".

And since there is such a phenomenon out there in the real world, it follows that bachelors exist.

Very simple.

Quote :

Name one object that it infinite.

So you don't think that time is infinite in both directions (no beginning and no end) as well as infinitely divisible (i.e. that for every two points in time there is a point in time in between them?)

Quote :

I am not defining "one" at all.

You already did.

Quote :

One is now a "symbol".
What is a symbol?

The word "one" is a symbol.

Symbol: a portion of reality used by intelligent beings to represent some other portion of reality.

These can be written and spoken words, pictures, movements, etc.

So "one" and "human" are representations of something else.
Is that what you are saying, dipshit?

So "human" is not literally a human....and "one" is not literally one...and "whole" is not literally whole.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

You already did.

No, imbecile...we are dealing with what you think I defined it as...not what I actually said.

We are discussing YOUR understanding...not mine.

My definitions are given elsewhere, which you have never read. Here it is all about you.

Quote :

So "one" and "human" are representations of something else.
Is that what you are saying dipshit?

Yes, that's what I'm saying.
Good thing you're finally starting to understand what I'm saying.
It's been a time.

Quote :

So "human" is not literally a human....and one is not literally one...and whole is not literally whole.

Now that would be your own convoluted version of English language.

The word "human" and the phenomenon represented by the word "human" are two different things.
No doubt about that.

However, that does not mean that the word "one" implies finitude.

Now read how "metaphor" is defined in your "conventional" use of language.
Is the word "human" an actual human...literally a human....or a representation alluding to an actual phenomenon called "human", you pathetic imbecile?

What does "one" imply?

Quote :

No, imbecile...we are dealing with what you think I defined it as...not what I actually said.

That's exactly what I'm dealing with.

Quote :

My definitions are given elsewhere, which you have never read.

You provided definitions in this thread just as well.
And it is not true that I didn't read these other threads of yours.

So, the word "human" is static...it can exist as a word for centuries. The organism it refers to is mortal, and dynamic and mutable....is that it you sad fucking piece of human excrement?

Satyr wrote:

Now read how "metaphor" is defined in your "conventional" use of language.
Is the word "human" an actual human...literally a human....or a representation alluding to an actual phenomenon called "human", you pathetic imbecile?

The word "human" is not the same thing as that which it represents.
However, that does not mean the word "human" is a metaphor.

My definitions on this thread were not complete....not qualified...because you are a dimwit who began insulting me.
We are going to do it your way, dimwit....long, painstakingly laborious.
but that's how it is when you are dealing with an imbecile, like you.

Satyr wrote:

So, the word "human" is static...it can exist as a word for centuries. The organism it refers to is mortal, and dynamic and mutable....is that it you sad fucking piece of human excrement?

That's irrelevant.
The word "one" still doesn't imply finitude.

Satyr wrote:

you are a dimwit who began insulting me.

That's highly questionable.

Magnus Anderson wrote:

Satyr wrote:

Now read how "metaphor" is defined in your "conventional" use of language.
Is the word "human" an actual human...literally a human....or a representation alluding to an actual phenomenon called "human", you pathetic imbecile?

The word "human" is not the same thing as that which it represents.
However, that does not mean the word "human" is a metaphor.

So human is literal....then what is anthropos?

What is the word itself, you insane imbecile?
Is it a literal human...or does it represent and refer to something else?

Magnus Anderson wrote:

Satyr wrote:

you are a dimwit who began insulting me.

That's highly questionable.

Just like this is "high reasoning"...this indicating what you are providing for us.

So, retard...the name "rose" is not an actual rose.....nor is the concept in your tiny pea-brain - how you understand metaphor - is a rose.
It alludes to something else....to something outside the mind.
it is a representation...is that so, fuckwit?

Dictionary wrote:

met·a·phor
/ˈmedəˌfôr,ˈmedəˌfər/
Learn to pronounce
noun
noun: metaphor; plural noun: metaphors

   a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
   "her poetry depends on suggestion and metaphor"
   synonyms: figure of speech, figurative expression, image, trope, allegory, parable, analogy, comparison, symbol, emblem, word painting, word picture; literaryconceit
       a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else, especially something abstract.
       "the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"

Origin
late 15th century: from French métaphore, via Latin from Greek metaphora, from metapherein ‘to transfer’.

Human is a symbol...not a literal human.
It transfers the phenomenon into a noumenon.

There is no human...there is an organism named human.
Man gives phenomena symbols....right imbecile?
Sometimes they refer to something in the world, or they refer to abstractions and symbols that have no reference to anything in the world.

Right dimwit?

Quote :

So human is literal....then what is anthropos?

I don't think you understand what the word "literal" means.

Quote :

So, retard...the name "rose" is not an actual rose.....nor is the concept in your tiny pea-brain - how you understand metaphor - is a rose.

Yes, the name "rose" is not an actual rose.
However, that does not mean the word "rose" is a metaphor.
That's simply not what the word "metaphor" means.

You better hope your idiocy doesn't fatigue me, retard....If it does this will be over.
Like pulling teeth from a horse's arse.
See that was a simile.

So, a word refers to what, imbecile?
Before the abstraction in your tiny mind....of a horse, let's say....what does horse, the word, represent?

Read the definition of "metaphor" dipshit....the last segment.
Is the word "rose" a symbol, representative of something else?
Another will use another symbol....right, idiot?

Language is an art-form, imbecile...and you are autistic with no artistry.
You are not cut-out for philosophy.
You stick to mundane stuff.

Like a sculptor and painter must use technique - poetic licence - to represent movement, or feeling, using static materials, so too must a philosopher use technique, with words, to represent what cannot be represented using conventional language...or to add a subtle nuance that connects it to something else.

All language, imbecile, is representational.

Like Will to Life - Schopenhaur...or Will to Power...or Dasien.....or Platonic ideals...or Heraclitus' "fire" as existence.

Quote :

You better hope your idiocy doesn't fatigue me, retard....If it does this will be over.

That's okay.

Quote :

Read the definition of "metaphor" dipshit....the last segment.

"A metaphor is a figure of speech that, for rhetorical effect, directly refers to one thing by mentioning another."

Saying "He's a lion" to mean "He's a fierce warrior" is a metaphor.
Saying "He's a fierce warrior" to mean "He's a fierce warrior" is not a metaphor.

Using the word "lion" to describe what the word really means is not a figurative use of the word.

Quote :

Language is an art-form, imbecile...and you are autistic with no artistry.

Actually, it's the other way around.
You are the one with the irrational hatred of highly abstract concepts.

Give me one abstract concept I am "afraid" of....One?

One as finite or infinite? which one do you think I am "troubled" by, and why, dimwit?

I already gave you . . . one.

Give me one abstract concept I am "afraid" of....One?

One as finite or infinite? which one do you think I am "troubled" by, and why, dimwit?

Is one so complicated a concept only dimwits, like you understand the conventional definition?

Is one infinite?
How can a finite symbol be infinite?
Is a symbol infinite, or a representation of a concept which may not be clearly - completely wholly, perfectly - conceptualized?