|
|
Posted by mbstevens on 11/19/18 11:34
Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
> "mbstevens" <NOXwebmasterx@xmbstevensx.com> skrev i meddelandet
> news:rNsnf.2424$n1.1171@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>Luigi Donatello Asero wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>>you cannot have a negative definition
>>>>
>>>>It was never a negative _definition_ at all! Just an observation
>>>>about a quality.
>>>
>>>
>>>Negative as absence of a certain item or quality, for example a suit
>
> which
>
>>>is neither blue nor yellow
>>
>>Positive or negative, the comment in question wasn't a definition,
>>_period_.
>>
>>"It's very unaustralian" was an observation, not a definition.
>
>
> To me it was both.
> As soon as you qualify something by an adjective you define it.
You are trapped in the Semiotic post-structuralist party line.
Here, try Mensky on for size, let this roll around in your primate
wetware for a while -- don't reject it out of hand:
"The secret of what anything means to us depends on how we've connected
it to all the other things we know. That's why it's almost always wrong
to seek the 'real meaning' of anything. A thing with just one meaning
has scarcely any meaning at all."
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|