Words Have Changing Referents
May 11th, 2008, search relatedRelated posts :: Words Have Changing Referents :: Words Have Changing Referents :: Self-Indentity Over Time — Is It True At All? :: Self-Indentity Over Time — Is It True At All?
Thank you for addressing the text I cited.
On 5/5/08, Joseph Polanik wrote:
> Anthony Crifasi wrote:
>
> >your posts since then support a reconstruction of your argument as
> >follows:
>
> >>>* it is a fact that, in english, the first-person singular pronoun is
> >>>now and has for centuries been spelled ‘I’.
>
> >>>* it is a fact that a given person uses ‘I’ for self-referencing at
> >>various points in time.
>
> >>>* these two facts must have an explanation.
>
> >>>* the only possible explanation is Q, that that the referent of ‘I’
> >>>is always self-identical.
>
> >>>* but, at [2], -Q is assumed/concluded: the referent of ‘I’ is never
> >>>self-identical.
>
> >>>* therefore … what? that your claim to have found the only possible
> >>>explanation for the unchanged spelling of the english first-person
> >>>singular pronoun is false?
>
> >>I cited Hume’s explanation here:
>
> >>
> http://an-archos.com/pipermail/heidegger…
>
> what you ‘cited’ was a quote from Hume to the effect that the referents
> of words were constantly changing. how can that possibly help you
> explain how words can retain the same spelling while their referents
> change over time?
Do you see his argument that even if there is NEVER any identity in the
referent (i.e., not identity for short spans of time, but rather never any
identity whatsoever), that such identity will still be (fictitiously)
ascribed when the changes from one moment to the next are not abrupt and
sudden (like a house demolished all at once and rebuilt), but gradual and
easy (like a house replaced one bit at a time over years until every piece
is different)?
