Means and Meaning
Warning: random musings ahead.
PART 1 - Creating Aboutness
I like to verb words. Sometimes it weirds them. Other times it shows that English actually contains a memory of linguistic contributions of people who were, perhaps, more honest in their thoughts.
The word I want to verb today is meaning. Meaning as in "to mean" just like running is "to run." Sounds weird doesn't it? Hear me out.
1a : the thing one intends to convey especially by language : purport
1b : the thing that is conveyed especially by language : import
2: something meant or intended : aim <a mischievous meaning was apparent>
3: significant quality; especially : implication of a hidden or special significance <a glance full of meaning>
4a : the logical connotation of a word or phrase
4b : the logical denotation or extension of a word or phrase
Meaning as commonly used is heavily tied with purpose, intent, or "aboutness." I want to ignore the communicative aspects of the word right now and focus on intent and purpose.
What is the purpose of a hammer? If you said "to pound in nails" then congratulations, you just assumed context and I would say answered it incorrectly. The correct answer is it's a bullshit question.
See, the hammer doesn't have little XML tags attached to its atoms exclaiming its purpose. Purpose is something which exists in the mind. The creator of it had something in mind when it was created and various users of it have something in mind for it. If all agents disappeared from the universe, purpose would go with it.
Why is this relevant? Because humans are good at putting themselves into the minds of others (or at least other humans) and figuring out why someone would make something. They're also decent at figuring out what something would be good for (effective of). I would like to suggest that meaning could be defined as "the process of finding uses for something - the process of MENTALLY MAKING (recognizing) SOMETHING A MEANS." So just as SEEing is taking in information to form beliefs. MEANing is taking in information to form beliefs about what something is effective of.
As far as the communicative aspect, words are defined by use. Reality itself is mapped by use. Definitions "carve reality" not along "its joints" in the sense that those joints are the only possible ones to make cuts, but along "joints which enable the concept to be manipulated and held in a way useful to the concept-holder."
Communication of concepts cannot help but convey hidden potential uses in definitions. It doesn't seem strange to me that meaning and definition would be treated identically in language. Both usefulness and identity can seem to fall under the word "about." Hammers are "about" (for - usually) hammering. That's why they're called that. Hammers are also identified as (about) that which can hammer (in terms of use) or that thing with a stick and a smashing surface (to pull it out from the chaos of reality).
The word I want to verb today is meaning. Meaning as in "to mean" just like running is "to run." Sounds weird doesn't it? Hear me out.
1a : the thing one intends to convey especially by language : purport
1b : the thing that is conveyed especially by language : import
2: something meant or intended : aim <a mischievous meaning was apparent>
3: significant quality; especially : implication of a hidden or special significance <a glance full of meaning>
4a : the logical connotation of a word or phrase
4b : the logical denotation or extension of a word or phrase
Meaning as commonly used is heavily tied with purpose, intent, or "aboutness." I want to ignore the communicative aspects of the word right now and focus on intent and purpose.
What is the purpose of a hammer? If you said "to pound in nails" then congratulations, you just assumed context and I would say answered it incorrectly. The correct answer is it's a bullshit question.
See, the hammer doesn't have little XML tags attached to its atoms exclaiming its purpose. Purpose is something which exists in the mind. The creator of it had something in mind when it was created and various users of it have something in mind for it. If all agents disappeared from the universe, purpose would go with it.
Why is this relevant? Because humans are good at putting themselves into the minds of others (or at least other humans) and figuring out why someone would make something. They're also decent at figuring out what something would be good for (effective of). I would like to suggest that meaning could be defined as "the process of finding uses for something - the process of MENTALLY MAKING (recognizing) SOMETHING A MEANS." So just as SEEing is taking in information to form beliefs. MEANing is taking in information to form beliefs about what something is effective of.
As far as the communicative aspect, words are defined by use. Reality itself is mapped by use. Definitions "carve reality" not along "its joints" in the sense that those joints are the only possible ones to make cuts, but along "joints which enable the concept to be manipulated and held in a way useful to the concept-holder."
Communication of concepts cannot help but convey hidden potential uses in definitions. It doesn't seem strange to me that meaning and definition would be treated identically in language. Both usefulness and identity can seem to fall under the word "about." Hammers are "about" (for - usually) hammering. That's why they're called that. Hammers are also identified as (about) that which can hammer (in terms of use) or that thing with a stick and a smashing surface (to pull it out from the chaos of reality).
PART 2 - Inputs as Aboutness, Wiring Inputs to Outputs
I distinguish between actualizing goals/ends and satisfying desires. The example I like to use is one of a hunger signal. Anatomically, the vagus nerve is the cause of the signals reaching the brain. If I "trick" the nerve, I can feel hungry or full regardless of the current contents of my stomach. If I'm full then my desire to eat has been satisfied; the propensity to eat under conditions of (believed) hunger continue to exist but the dispositions are no longer activated (desire). The goal/end of being fed/having nutrients/whatever has NOT been actualized or in any other way realized. Belief is the key difference; with true beliefs, satisfaction of desire and actualization of goals are always in lockstep.
What is the MEANING of the signal, what is it about? It's wired through outputs to cause me to seek food. It is instrumental to the goal of being nourished or staying alive. Granted, that's just what I call it - in the territory dispositions are just "stuff doing stuff."
But is that really a goal I have? Yes. If it's a disposition, and it's activated, it's a goal which exists IN ME - it's mine. But what if I want to do things other than eat? Then I can (presumably) "belay the order" coming from my stomach.
Aboutness and meaning are how inputs are connected to outputs, it's how things are chained. Inputs form beliefs which integrate with dispositions to form desires, beliefs then integrate with those desires to produce action output. The path of inputs and internal conception manipulation through to output is "aboutness" or MEANing.
What is the MEANING of the signal, what is it about? It's wired through outputs to cause me to seek food. It is instrumental to the goal of being nourished or staying alive. Granted, that's just what I call it - in the territory dispositions are just "stuff doing stuff."
But is that really a goal I have? Yes. If it's a disposition, and it's activated, it's a goal which exists IN ME - it's mine. But what if I want to do things other than eat? Then I can (presumably) "belay the order" coming from my stomach.
Aboutness and meaning are how inputs are connected to outputs, it's how things are chained. Inputs form beliefs which integrate with dispositions to form desires, beliefs then integrate with those desires to produce action output. The path of inputs and internal conception manipulation through to output is "aboutness" or MEANing.
