Eudaimonia
New member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2011
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- New Zealand
- Current Location
- New Zealand
I have been havig some trouble for quite some time gettig my head around how a word is defined.
My question is this: If i have a word such as 'house', this can be definied in many ways so that there is no 'true' house, instead there is a myriad of definitions, all equally valid, and by this defiition, are all equally invalid untill they are proven. A proof may be given which has exceptions that break down the rule.
So is there a 'correct' way to define words?
they seem to be defined on other words, which themselves lack concrete definitions, does this contiue on untill we define all other words by one word; logos?
I have also been trying to figure out how lawyers (i am not) use words as proofs, my example being,
"this man is crazy"
crazy can mean any number of things, for example it can mean, "beyond my comprehesion" or "different from political norms" or even disabled of the mind, or even hes fun to be around. each definition can be interpreted to mean any number of things which leads language to be very crude, and open to misuse/abuse and altered paradigms of the mind.
so can words be defined?
Any ideas would be great, or if there is a philosopher that has got ito the topic I would be greatful to know.
ps: i know i used words to write this and this thread could mean any number of things but try be rational here :-D
My question is this: If i have a word such as 'house', this can be definied in many ways so that there is no 'true' house, instead there is a myriad of definitions, all equally valid, and by this defiition, are all equally invalid untill they are proven. A proof may be given which has exceptions that break down the rule.
So is there a 'correct' way to define words?
they seem to be defined on other words, which themselves lack concrete definitions, does this contiue on untill we define all other words by one word; logos?
I have also been trying to figure out how lawyers (i am not) use words as proofs, my example being,
"this man is crazy"
crazy can mean any number of things, for example it can mean, "beyond my comprehesion" or "different from political norms" or even disabled of the mind, or even hes fun to be around. each definition can be interpreted to mean any number of things which leads language to be very crude, and open to misuse/abuse and altered paradigms of the mind.
so can words be defined?
Any ideas would be great, or if there is a philosopher that has got ito the topic I would be greatful to know.
ps: i know i used words to write this and this thread could mean any number of things but try be rational here :-D