>In general, association between the symbol and what it
>symbolises. But look at what you've said here: it "means
>something to someone". And that's the point: all
>meaning is "to someone", ie is subjective. Sure you
I said that because I thought (correctly) that it is
common ground we can work from. I didn't say that
meaning is limited to symbols.
>can find regularities between the presentation of
>symbols to people, and their behaviour, and talk about
>that in terms of causation, but to say that all meaning
>involves causation, is not to say that all causation is
>meaning. Meaning is just one aspect of a very particular
>sort of causation, and it's a subjective aspect.
The only point was to get you to agree that meaning is related
to causality. Now, is meaning limited to symbols?
-- David McFadzean david@lucifer.com Memetic Engineer http://www.lucifer.com/~david/ Church of Virus http://www.lucifer.com/virus/