On Jul 22, 2009, at 9:10 PM, Terence Love wrote:
> As always, nominalization reduces information and sensitivity of any
> representation and increases the opportunity for us to wrangle the
> meaning
> to whatever we want it to mean.
Do excuse meTerry, but this statement along with the rest of your
posted comment is reactive hogwash ie truly weird reasoning! I don't
buy any of it!
Naming things is how we begin to apprehend their meaning. It allows
the mind to objectify something to be sensitive to and define. It
enables the information associated with the name to be interpreted to
a situation or prior knowledge and to expand information to whatever
extent that the named entity can support. But this does not in itself
imply the distortion you imply with the phrase "to wrangle the meaning
to whatever we want it to mean". In my view that depends on how the
attributes and properties of a nominal entity are related in
conceptual models that suit the purposes of the thinker. It is the
intention of the thinker that is responsible not the nominal entity.
Verbs may well put into action nominal entities that have not been
appropriately defined or related to their context with positive
intent. Naming, and ordering things is in my view how we begin to
think. We must objectify and have intention toward a situation before
we can structure, express or act.
Warm regards anyway,
Chuck
|