 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Touche 
Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...
Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....
Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Touche
Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...
Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....
Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example
"
This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question.  I liked it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Touche
Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...
Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....
Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example
"
I think if people all agreed on a universal definition of swinging then the label ‘swinger’ would not be a problem. But I guess definitions of all labels evolve.
Mrs |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered. "
Do it do it do it do it |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Touche
Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...
Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....
Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example
This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question. I liked it."
Thank you. I'm flattered anyone ever reads my random mumblings.
I didn't feel aimed at... I'm to thick skinned... or is that just too thick
It amused me to see you had put it up as a new thread. But then you do post interesting stuff.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.
Do it do it do it do it "
Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?
Describe what you're looking for without using labels. "
I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Touche
Perhaps it's not the labels that are the issue....after all everything has a name or label...
Maybe it's more when they are used to put people in boxes as a one dimensional shorthand....
Like single people aren't proper swingers... just a random example
This isn't aimed at you. You just gave me the idea for the question. I liked it.
Thank you. I'm flattered anyone ever reads my random mumblings.
I didn't feel aimed at... I'm to thick skinned... or is that just too thick
It amused me to see you had put it up as a new thread. But then you do post interesting stuff. "
You just gave yourself a compliment, nice one! - Because you inspired my OP.
I like a lot of posts, I'm not as grumpy as I come across. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?
Describe what you're looking for without using labels.
I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX"
Nah steely would never do that |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"People often seem to get wound up about labels. Without labels how would you meet?
Describe what you're looking for without using labels.
I like your profile picture, is it a piss take of men who have cock pics over the toilet bowl? XXX"
Yes it is.
Unfortunately most men don't get it.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.
Do it do it do it do it
Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language. "
Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.
Do it do it do it do it
Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language.
Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x "
I'm trying to figure out which theory of language would explain you calling me Marc.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.
Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"I was so tempted, when I first read this, to go into some philosophy of language and theorize that all language is a series of labels. But I'm tired and I can't be bothered.
Do it do it do it do it
Well, logical positivists often support the theory of referential realism. In this theory, all language is a series of labels, essentially, whose referents are objects in the real world. Some philosophers, such as Wittgenstein, argue against this theory because he argues that use, not referents, describe language. However, more moderate philosophies have been argued for since, such as mediated reference theory (one famous supporter of this theory of language is Britain's very own Bertrand Russell). There is a strong inclination for philosophers who study language to favor some form of mediated reference theory. I've read a bit of Wittgenstein myself and I find him unconvincing. Although, his "use" theory would also, I beleive, fall foul of those individuals who think we should stop labeling everything. Labels are simply a necessary function of language.
Bloody hell Marc, I'm not ashamed to admit that whooshed right over my head, sorry. Thank you though. x
I'm trying to figure out which theory of language would explain you calling me Marc. "
I know it's you really. I'm just crap with names. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.
Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough."
I agree. One person's understanding of a label will be different to another's. Maybe labels are just shorthand. Communication is key. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The map is not the territory, the label at best is an approximation to the thing it describes. Our use of language/ labels is an attempt to guide us and what we want. I would have to use many more words to describe my sexuality than one to get even close to the reality. So the problem occurs when my profile says I’m bisexual, all sorts of assumptions based on the reader’s understanding of the word are used to interpret its meaning.
Labels need to be specific to be really helpful, unfortunately some are not helpful enough.
I agree. One person's understanding of a label will be different to another's. Maybe labels are just shorthand. Communication is key. "
They are shorthand, communication is key, but is often bypassed in favour of snap judgements |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
Epic fail 