Words matter

Rectifiation of names, Confucius Examination of names, Socrates Wittgenstein Weasel words, Scott Adams Suitcase words

–

Until the late 19th century, the prevailing theory was that signs and referents were arbitrarily related. A town named Dartmouth doesn’t necessarily sit at the mouth of the Dart River. If it did, and the river dried up, the name wouldn’t have to change. In the right context, ‘Dartmouth’ might refer to a crater on the moon. The sign was just a means of pointing at something.

Then a logician named Gottlob Frege pointed out an issue: in Ancient Greece, there were two celestial bodies named Phosphorus (Morning Star) and Hesperus (Evening Star), both of which happened to be Venus. At first glance, this doesn’t seem to be a problem; both signs share a referent, so they’re just different ways of talking about Venus. But if Evening Star and Morning Star are just synonyms for each other, then these sentences should be interchangeable:

Homer believed the Morning Star was the Morning Star. Homer believed the Morning Star was the Evening Star. The first sentence is obviously true, but the second one is almost certainly false: that fact wasn’t discovered until hundreds of years after Homer’s death.

It’s clear, then, that they are not synonyms. We cannot only consider what a name references, we must also consider how it is referenced. Frege called this the sense of a name.

Zach Tellman in Elements of Clojure goes into detail about naming things: variables, functions, macros. In doing so he introduces philosophical concepts about names. Names have signs and referrents. We may assume using various signs for the same referrent is alright. Gottlob Frege attacked this by the example of Venus being referred to as the morning star and the evening star in ancient Greece. If this is alright, and they are synonyms, sentences should be alright when they are swapped, but the following two sentences are not the same: Homer believed the morning star is the morning star (true), and Home believed the morning star is the evening star (false, this was not discovered until much later). Things in code need to be named so as to convey the sense of the concept. Natural names are broad. Synthetic names prevent readers from reasoning by analogy and bringing their own intuition.

“Synthetic names have little downside for an audience that already understands them and enable them to communicate complex ideas. For novices, each synthetic name represents an obstacle that must be surmounted. Natural names allow for continuous progress but at the risk of misunderstandings along the way. “

ties into the importance of right words for communication

why the original german for the 5 elements

the right words for branding

–

“The riddle is a public spectacle of people not defining their words for each other so they can avoid accountability and thinking, while protecting their status.” https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Kl8w_BUfbIDEhG-T9HhcX5PcOAyOyMbtQ5mFnOjBoTk/edit#slide=id.g5099cae64e_0_176

Groups become efficient by creating a shared language. On the flip side it limits the ability to evolve, unable to respond to changes in the environment. Past language limits future vision. The consequent decline is beaten down by the creation of new language.

The Voltaire Principle: An outsider introducing new language may incite radical change. Voltaire published his Philosophical Dictionary in 1764 which was widely read and discussed in private. It’s ideas spread and 25 years later fueled the revolution.

“If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” — George Orwell, 1984.

Man acts as though he were the shaper and master of language, while in fact language remains the master of man – Martin Heidegger

References:

Related:

Notes mentioning this note

There are no notes linking to this note.

Here are all the notes in this garden, along with their links, visualized as a graph. If you don't see any nodes try zooming and panning in the grey area.