Re: Meaning (was Re: virus: New Virus Page)

Robin Faichney (robin@faichney.demon.co.uk)
Wed, 25 Feb 1998 19:05:35 +0000

In message <3.0.5.32.19980225100321.0379daf0@lucifer.com>, David
McFadzean <david@lucifer.com> writes
>At 11:11 PM 2/24/98 -0800, Tim Rhodes wrote:
>>Are you saying that the `meaning' of the Holocaust was the creation of an
>>independent Jewish nation?
>
>Yes, That is part of the meaning because that is one of the effects.
>
>To go into a bit more detail I think there are three types of meaning,
>all related to cause and effect. If X means Y then one of three situations
>is true:
>1) X caused Y
>2) X was intended to cause Y
>3) X caused knowledge of Y
>
>...
>
>Are there any examples of the usage of "meaning" that doesn't fit into
>one of these categories?

I don't know about that, but here's one that covers
all these: meaning is use in a particular context.
Which was (the later) Wittgenstein's view.

I don't think W's take is necessarily better just
because it covers all 3, but it does have the
advantage of leaving out causation where is there
is no human (or sentient?) agency. So a canyon
is not a "meaning" of a river.

-- 
Robin