> -snip-
>
> >Definitions are absolutely essential to communication
> >and (as abstractions) understanding.
>
> I have to agree with you on this, whole-heartedly. People think things
> are
> "just semantics." But semantics are the only way that we can relate to
> each
> other.[1]
>
> --- John
>
> [1] This includes hand gestures, body-language, etc: a "semantics" --
> if
> you will -- of non-spoken language. We're all aware that similar
> gestures
> have wildly different connotations in different languages.
Are you saying that because the same body language can be
interpreted differently by different people that it is "defined"?
If so, then I think we need a definition for "defined".
How about a baby's cry, is that defined? I think we will find
that everybody interprets it the same way. There
is a lot we can communicate without definitions just because
we are pre-wired that way. But I suppose you could call
our pre-wiring part of being defined if you really wanted
to stretch the definition of what it means to be defined.
Trouble is, stretch it too far and it becomes meaningless.
mike