Small thoughts on the Philosophy of Language

[wolven7]

Peter Schilling - [Major Tom]--- We all have names by which we are known, in the world. Descriptions of one person may range in scope, containing more or less information about that person, than the listener may posses. This is why we have conversations such as "Do you know _______?" "With the orange hair?" "Yeah, Orange-ish; wears camouflage pants, a lot?" "Yeah, I know _______." But there is something new, now, in the age of "Teh Intarweb." We have different descriptors, for people, and these descriptors all point to the same referent, but.... We are aware of this, as we never may have been, in the past.

When I describe or name someone, in the world, now, I can give any range of descriptive constituents. (Voltaire - [Irresponsible]). I can give any number of Names (and i'm missing the Philosophy of Language approved Term, for "Name," here, if anyone can help me out.), as well, and direct my listener's knowledge of the subject, without their having to fill in quite so much. This is good and bad, really. Causes us to hav eto think a little less, but it also makes sure we're more well informed, overall.

When i speak of you, whoever the hell you may be, i can give the main name by which i know you, any internet handles by which i think my listener should know you (unless i'm sure they don't, and in which case i don't give those things out, unless i know you're okay with it), and any other public psuedonyms and descriptors of which you may be possessed.... (Liars - [Flow My Tears the Spider Said]) Mmmm possession...

System of a Down - [Spiders]--- Uhm.... I think a certain spider god wants a talk with me....

I have to go now. These thoughts brought to you by my clarifying the existence of a person, with his given name, and his lj username. Ta.

{4.20pm:Death in Vegas - [Opium Shuffle]--- Swiped from comorbid. Funny

You scored as Wrath. </td> Wrath 81% Pride 101% Sloth 44% Gluttony 38% Lust 31% Envy 25% Greed 19% Seven deadly sins created with QuizFarm.com

{{9.31pm: Covenant - [Leviathan]--- My little joke. Appropriate, yes? ;)

10.01pm: Read this story. Didn't give it enough front time, i guess. Whatever. There.}}}

Comments

[unknownbinaries.livejournal.com]

Accumulating Names...Or lending power to an existing one...Fun. Overlapping selves and the centre is the Singularity-Self...

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Exactly. With the external vibratory wave-form. ;)

[mr-hinzelmann.livejournal.com]

What prompted this?

[tribeofone.livejournal.com]

The kabalists refer to naming as the "intelligence of Adam" the first man and therefore the giver of names. Names like most labels often incorrectly serve as limitations, threw there dual purpose as definitions. Often people allow themself's to fall into the trapping of the limits of their names, and title not breaking free to be what and whom they are when they simply are.... this is one of those conversations that tends to go and go... not up for doing that much typing at the moment, trying to focus on homework and laundry

[wolven.livejournal.com]

As I said, the act of me refering to someone, then clarifying that with an lj user name. Just kind of popped up. Sure there was something else building.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

My point was just the opposite: That we know so many names for each other that we are Freer, more able to move than to limit ourselves, in our choosings, and namings. Descriptions instead of restrictions.

[tribeofone.livejournal.com]

Oh, that is the other way of looking at it, but it really does depend on perspective.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

True. But isn't everything? ;)

[missmeganmaude.livejournal.com]

It is interesting how we come to be known by a variety of names which are not all used necessarily by the same group of people. It can be asserted that different groups of friends represent different aspects of one's personality. That being the case, I offer that one's names, by which they are known in said groups of people, also indicate different aspects of one's personality. And I believe that's what you're getting at, yes? Knowing a handful of names by which a person is known allows you to better understand who they might actually be and also allows you to better communicate who they might be to others.

Interestingly enough I was thinking about names earlier this morning when I was looking through some comments on deviantART and someone shortened my name to "electron" when referring to me. I thought that rather queer. Why wouldn't you shorten it to "cat" if you're going to shorten it. And if you're going to bugger with typing out "electron" is it really so much harder to type out "cat" at the end? I thought it an odd abbreviation.

Duke Ellington & John Coltrane - [Angelica]

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Yes, you've got it exactly, and clarified a bit. The more we know of what a person chooses to present, and how, the better we know them. Whether they want us to, or not. It's one of many reasons i ask people, before giving out screen names, and such.

And that Is rather odd. Cat would be the easier abbreviation, and to leave it off the end, after having gone through the trouble... Maybe the person in question had a point to make by the use of only the Electron?

Odd...

Re: Duke Ellington & John Coltrane - [Angelica]

[missmeganmaude.livejournal.com]

*yay* I helped! ^__^

Interestingly enough, I believe there was no point to just using "electron" as the person also abbreviated another name in a similar fashion. However, the other abbreviation actually significantly shortened the person's name. Maybe it was for consistency's sake? Strange none the less.

Re: Duke Ellington & John Coltrane - [Angelica]

[wolven.livejournal.com]

See, now THAT makes it weird. Maybe he was taught that you abbreviate from the front... I dunno...

observations of a Sloth

[celestial-fluke.livejournal.com]

how did you manage to get wrath when clearly your score for pride was higher? this test is flawed.

Re: observations of a Sloth

[wolven.livejournal.com]

As i said, my little joke. Html editing is fun :)

Plus i got wrath, and liked the picture, better. I just didn't like the questions for Pride, as they weren't truly prideful questions.