Mind

Meaning in intensionality

Similar as to how any piece of art has a certain value, and more specifically a certain meaning, so too can no thought or uttering be fully meaningless or false. [Though I must immediately mention that in that same similarity, the meaning of an uttering is neccessarily never exactly that which the author thinks he is expressing.] But this then presents us with a big problem as to what to think of contradictions. The simplest way out, it seems, is to inspect the intensional nature of the uttering exemplifying the contradiction in question. Although the logical form may be false, and therefore meaningless in a way -- certainly the intensional matter is not? What is void of meaning, anyway?

Resemblence and logical form

Is there such a thing as a purely logical uttering? I would think not, in view of the above. But then, in order not to deny the existence of logic (or, the apparent arrangement of the world in such a way that it obeys what we call logic), one is almost forced to explain logicality of speech in terms of resemblance. A contradictory act of speech resembles no natural arrangement, at least in the sense in which it was meant: speech does not only have reference, it has reified reference. Formally put: an utterance S = S(r) may have an intended logical form, or a reified reference r, but it may unproblematically occur that its actual reference R does not correspond to it: S -> R, while r -> falsity /= R. An uncontradictory act of speech may very well resemble to a certain degree a natural arrangement, say S(r) -> R, with r -> (R' resembling R). Well, this actually may get technical and recursive, say if S(r) -> R(R'), with R' resembling R(R').

Will language mirror natural arrangement?

In this last view, we easily see the tendency of language towards mirroring the natural arrangement. Several things come to mind on this observation: (1) Is this indeed a natural tendency, or a fluke? ... (2) ..?

Naturality

(Ethics diverges from naturality, right? -- the human wish or endeavor etc.)

"Sources"

These speculations of mine are a result of (superficial) knowledge (or having heard) of:

• Computer science term "reification", general computer scientific conceptual framework of information, directedness, etc.; mathematical concept of approximation/recursion etc.
• Thoughts about (meaning of) art.
• A little bit of linguistics.
  ... ?