Syntax and semantics

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
ReasonMadeFlesh
Posts: 744
Joined: September 2nd, 2013, 11:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Jesus Christ
Location: Here & Now

Syntax and semantics

Post by ReasonMadeFlesh »

It all depends what you mean!

One word can mean many different things to many people. Now imagine if all the problems of philosophy could be resolved via careful clarification of language.

If there is a sign, how are we to assign meaning to it?

Meaning is use. We sometimes forget the meaning of words, and their meaning must evolve and change in time.

This is why the ultimate True philosophy can never be written. We are constantly mutating, as are the very signs and symbols and memories we use to try to pin down an unpinnable world.

When we look back at what we have written, it often ceases to make sense. In this everchanging world, we are not static observers, we go by with the rest of it, and there is no you to cling to it anyway.
"A philosopher who does not take part in discussions is like a boxer who never goes into the ring." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
User avatar
Mosesquine
Posts: 189
Joined: September 3rd, 2016, 4:17 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Mosesquine »

There is a semantic theory for natural language developed by Donald Davidson. The theory is called 'truth conditional semantics'. Here's an example:

(∀S)(∀t)(True("The tallest President of USA is not a creature with head" S, t) ↔ ~(∃x)(x is the tallest President of USA & ~(∃y)(y is the tallest President of USA & x ≠ y) & x is a creature with head))

For every speaker S, for every time t, "The tallest President of USA is not a creature with head" is true when spoken by speaker S at time t, iff it is not the case that there exists some x such that x is the tallest President of USA, and it is not the case that there exists some y such that y is the tallest President of USA, and it is not the case that x is identical to y; and x is a creature with head.
User avatar
ReasonMadeFlesh
Posts: 744
Joined: September 2nd, 2013, 11:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Jesus Christ
Location: Here & Now

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by ReasonMadeFlesh »

Formal logic can often convolute natural language more than is necessary.

Sometimes it's useful, in mathematics especially, and it can be useful to know modal logic, or even read Kripke and Lewis, but anything beyond that is just masturbation imo.

It'a application only becomes very interesting when looking at paradoxes like the liar paradox or other such problems that arise in language.

Russell's theory of descriptions was the solution to Meinong's problem with referring to nonexistent objects.

"The present King of France is bald"

false bc there is no such King. So it's a vacuous truth.

How are we to use the word 'not'? What is it that we are negating of something when we say it is not? Where is this nothing we are referring to? Or even when you want to discuss Russell's paradox and set theory.

Formal logic is useful in these areas. It is useful for logicians to tackle metaphysical problems this way.
"A philosopher who does not take part in discussions is like a boxer who never goes into the ring." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
User avatar
Mosesquine
Posts: 189
Joined: September 3rd, 2016, 4:17 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Mosesquine »

ReasonMadeFlesh wrote: June 7th, 2018, 6:16 pm Formal logic can often convolute natural language more than is necessary.

Sometimes it's useful, in mathematics especially, and it can be useful to know modal logic, or even read Kripke and Lewis, but anything beyond that is just masturbation imo.

It'a application only becomes very interesting when looking at paradoxes like the liar paradox or other such problems that arise in language.

Russell's theory of descriptions was the solution to Meinong's problem with referring to nonexistent objects.

"The present King of France is bald"

false bc there is no such King. So it's a vacuous truth.

How are we to use the word 'not'? What is it that we are negating of something when we say it is not? Where is this nothing we are referring to? Or even when you want to discuss Russell's paradox and set theory.

Formal logic is useful in these areas. It is useful for logicians to tackle metaphysical problems this way.


Formal logic is clearer than natural languages. This means that formal logic is better than natural languages in at least some aspects. Analogically speaking, shotguns are used because they are better than knifes in battles. Logicians are using formal logic in many other fields as well as mathematics, metaphysical problems, and the like. So, you, *ReasonMadeFlesh* are wrong in terms of your underestimating formal logic.
User avatar
ReasonMadeFlesh
Posts: 744
Joined: September 2nd, 2013, 11:07 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Jesus Christ
Location: Here & Now

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by ReasonMadeFlesh »

Mosesquine wrote: June 8th, 2018, 9:29 am
ReasonMadeFlesh wrote: June 7th, 2018, 6:16 pm Formal logic can often convolute natural language more than is necessary.

Sometimes it's useful, in mathematics especially, and it can be useful to know modal logic, or even read Kripke and Lewis, but anything beyond that is just masturbation imo.

It'a application only becomes very interesting when looking at paradoxes like the liar paradox or other such problems that arise in language.

Russell's theory of descriptions was the solution to Meinong's problem with referring to nonexistent objects.

"The present King of France is bald"

false bc there is no such King. So it's a vacuous truth.

How are we to use the word 'not'? What is it that we are negating of something when we say it is not? Where is this nothing we are referring to? Or even when you want to discuss Russell's paradox and set theory.

Formal logic is useful in these areas. It is useful for logicians to tackle metaphysical problems this way.

Formal logic is clearer than natural languages. This means that formal logic is better than natural languages in at least some aspects. Analogically speaking, shotguns are used because they are better than knifes in battles. Logicians are using formal logic in many other fields as well as mathematics, metaphysical problems, and the like. So, you, *ReasonMadeFlesh* are wrong in terms of your underestimating formal logic.
It depends on what you want to use it for.

A shotgun isn't the best tool for opening a can of beans. So with many philosophical problems, formal logic is unnecessary.

And I was talking about semantics in general as the meaning given to signs and symbols, not any particular theory of semantics in a formal sense, perhaps I should have been clearer.
"A philosopher who does not take part in discussions is like a boxer who never goes into the ring." - Ludwig Wittgenstein
User avatar
Mosesquine
Posts: 189
Joined: September 3rd, 2016, 4:17 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Mosesquine »

ReasonMadeFlesh wrote: June 8th, 2018, 10:16 am
Mosesquine wrote: June 8th, 2018, 9:29 am


Formal logic is clearer than natural languages. This means that formal logic is better than natural languages in at least some aspects. Analogically speaking, shotguns are used because they are better than knifes in battles. Logicians are using formal logic in many other fields as well as mathematics, metaphysical problems, and the like. So, you, *ReasonMadeFlesh* are wrong in terms of your underestimating formal logic.
It depends on what you want to use it for.

A shotgun isn't the best tool for opening a can of beans. So with many philosophical problems, formal logic is unnecessary.

And I was talking about semantics in general as the meaning given to signs and symbols, not any particular theory of semantics in a formal sense, perhaps I should have been clearer.


Your view that formal logic depends on what persons want to use it for is not right, according to current philosophical tendencies in English-speaking worlds. Fundamentally, formal logic techniques are widely used for avoiding meaningless expressions. Every anglophone philosophers think that so with many philosophical problems, formal logic is necessarily needed. Logic courses held in undergraduate level at colleges and universities are definite evidence.
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by The Beast »

It must be just so. Semantics is reason made flesh. In the search for truth (my truth) it helps to aid the truth (my truth). One system of truth composes answers in five terms of more likely or less likely. I may use this system to evaluate everything I had written. Semantics is what I use to justify my truth. However, I also include a system of quantities. Take for example the economic world. Divide the market in three parts. Each part is made of several countries aligned with treaties… and so, I compare to less; equal and more than equal. If it is less than equal, then I will proceed to find out why by dividing the group into smaller groups until finding out the culprit of the situation. I may choose to move to another group if it is in my power. Otherwise, I may use semantics or a ridiculous logic to hide the truth so that I could be what my truth said I’m not. Most truths are based on quantities. Creative accounting of less; equal or more than equal opposed to all or nothing. Creative accounting based on expectations of truth manipulated by creative accounting of actual results. Yeah! It may be a metaphor therefore, true… When is it that adjectives become metaphors? When are metaphors logically true? How could you tell fat or ugly if not with an elegant metaphor no one understands but you and the health system.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Burning ghost »

Every word is an amalgam of unobtainable singular “bits”. In order to write a narrative, or recite one verbally, we require to approach - in a blind manner - the narrative of each word in its lexical habitat.

Embedded in the novel is the story of the chapter, and within the story of the paragraph, the sentence, the word and then ... no obtainable “singular bit”.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by RJG »

Burning ghost wrote:Embedded in the novel is the story of the chapter, and within the story of the paragraph, the sentence, the word and then...
...bits of sensory experiences (...that make up the words, that make up the sentence, that makes up the paragraph, etc.).
User avatar
The Beast
Posts: 1403
Joined: July 7th, 2013, 10:32 pm

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by The Beast »

The understanding (in some cases) is overload by a representation of the imagination. The resulting feeling is one of (two bits?). two bits for each (in the agreeable, lovely, delightful, enjoyable). The negative noemata filters the objective to the causation of suffering… of loss. What is good raises (aha) to a feeling of Peace. And so, the truth should be adorned and made beautiful by semantics. The feeling coming from the intuition is one of approval. My objective is my truth. Perhaps in Kantian terms, the moment gets old allowing the intuition to take on more semantics or to linger on in the Universal truth. Give it Time… to make the understanding empirical and better… and yet, never more tasteful.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Burning ghost »

RJG wrote: June 10th, 2018, 12:19 pm
Burning ghost wrote:Embedded in the novel is the story of the chapter, and within the story of the paragraph, the sentence, the word and then...
...bits of sensory experiences (...that make up the words, that make up the sentence, that makes up the paragraph, etc.).
You’re just using words ... that was my point. For something is meant by “sensory” and “experience”, so the attempt to capture and express falls short of some ...

I’m Kantian this terms it is a fool who claims to know “positive noumenonal”, yet by expressing such a sentiment a fool I am; as are we all.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1122
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by ThomasHobbes »

Burning ghost wrote: June 10th, 2018, 1:14 pm
RJG wrote: June 10th, 2018, 12:19 pm
...bits of sensory experiences (...that make up the words, that make up the sentence, that makes up the paragraph, etc.).
You’re just using words ... that was my point. For something is meant by “sensory” and “experience”, so the attempt to capture and express falls short of some ...

I’m Kantian this terms it is a fool who claims to know “positive noumenonal”, yet by expressing such a sentiment a fool I am; as are we all.
When you 'understand' the "just words" then the words are more than "just words".
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by RJG »

Burning ghost wrote:You’re just using words ... that was my point. For something is meant by “sensory” and “experience”, so the attempt to capture and express falls short of some …
Yes. Agreed. Something is meant of "sensory" and "experience", and from where does this something derive its meaning? ...through sensory experiences!!! (...note: it is not the "words" themselves that dictate meaning, but it is from that which these words 'refer' to).

For example, what is meant of "CAT"? ...isn't it the sensory 'audio' experience of "Caa-Aaa-Taa". or the sensory 'visual' experience "C-A-T" associated with the sensory visual and maybe tactile sensation of a soft furry animal? (...resonating from memory, taught to us possibly by our mothers/teachers?) Meanings are the 'association' of sensory experiences.

Sensory experiences are at the ROOT of all meanings, and all that we know (understand). We use "words" merely as a short-hand (short-cut) to communicate these sensations to others. It is the 'meaning' that we wish to communicate, not the silly "word" itself.

ThomasHobbes wrote:When you 'understand' the "just words" then the words are more than "just words".
Bingo. Succinctly (and very well) stated!
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Burning ghost »

It’s like you’re both int3nrionalaly reading past what I said. So be it.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Syntax and semantics

Post by Burning ghost »

ThomasHobbes wrote: June 10th, 2018, 4:32 pm
Burning ghost wrote: June 10th, 2018, 1:14 pm

You’re just using words ... that was my point. For something is meant by “sensory” and “experience”, so the attempt to capture and express falls short of some ...

I’m Kantian this terms it is a fool who claims to know “positive noumenonal”, yet by expressing such a sentiment a fool I am; as are we all.
When you 'understand' the "just words" then the words are more than "just words".
But what do you “mean” by “understand”? That is all I was saying. There is a limit we’re forced to work within when parsing this or that item of experience.

My suggestion was to regard a “word” as a novel that is comprehended, yet (in this particular analogy) unreadable.

We can of course use universal terms, and we do (such as “such” and “as”), but they are not limited in how they may be applied to any given number of complex and/or contextual circumstances.

Another way to add to this problem would be to say “what cannot be spoken of cannot be spoken of.” Yet some would take this at face value and assume that that which cannot be spoken of is at least being referred to in that very sentence, which it isn’t, because it is merely a feeling around with words about the problem of articulating some thought.

All this is wrapped up in perspectives and applications of the term “absolute” and “accuracy”. They are concepts used to appreciate and which are applicable to communication between individuals.

If you don’t see what I mean it is not because I am incorrect. It is because of how you approach what I say, what “narratives” I apply to my words, and how I have wittingly tried to express something that is on the very edges of intelligible speech.
AKA badgerjelly
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021