View Full Version : On Meaning

12-25-2007, 03:49 AM
meaning is the interpretive/translational connections between some pattern of sensory input into subjective content.

I tend to bifurcate meaning into intellectual structure & emotional content/attachment.
I think of intellect as structure & form virtually devoid of emotion,
Emotion/feeling i think of as being like magnetic, polar or colored, perhaps energy [containing?]

If something has/had a purely emotional 'meaning' [content] then i think it would seem almost mystic, perhaps sort of other worldly, slightly strange
like it created a response but you had no reason/explanation why

If something has/had a purely intellectual connection/meaning it would be totally cryptic & have no gravitas of emotion, no way of evaluating its seeming importance, like it wouldn't register emotionally, like it was flat, unreadable symbols

i think we can copy meaning, create meaning, discover meaning, assign meaning
copying or assigning meaning would probably be a first stab at understanding.
Like someone you know well meets someone you don't & you can/might copy their response to this new person as an intial starting point, then as you were around them you would develop your own 'meaning' for this new person.
assigning meaning might be some arbitrary intial presumption to any standard stranger. Which would be filled in or altered from there.
we are constantly creating, or more often reshaping meaning structures & emotional content/attachments.
discovering meaning would be experiencing something for which you had almost no frame of reference. Learning something completely new to you.

Obviously our brains are creating, manufacturing our meanings whereby we interpret the world we live in. I think this is generally, for humans, some mix of cryptic intellectual structures & emotional content or color or gravitas.

A scientific perspective would have us vastly favoring the emphasis on intellectual structuring, but emotions are essential for motivation, those things that drive us to act. Without emotion we would have no reason [perhaps no ability] to create & organize structures.
I suspect it is some kind of dynamic system. Where the juggling never completely stops.
I think if we pay close attention, a structure emphasized meaning system produces the most advantageous results, but if we get too lost in cryptic structure we might lose track of the why, the motivation.

Reality or 'realness' is sort of the thing we attempt to assign the highest gravitas to [which for us is perhaps oddly/conversely emotional?]. Depending on how we see/interpret the context of our existence that sense of 'realness' could be wildly different. Rationally we want to emphasize pure intellect as being most empirically 'real'. But its emphasis must be conversely emotionally based. And for someone young & falling in & out of love & surrounded by other youngsters similarly 'afflicted' their basic presumptions of motivations would be very caught up in that emotional torrent & any dry analytical mind existence would seem almost artificial or pretentious, even if it weren't for someone else.

Reality is a subjective notion.

I was wondering if a person could intentionally create a sort of signature stylization to their meaning system. Like doing everything in delicate structure with soothing pastel emotional colors. Or use only a particular emotional color.

I wonder if the grossness of structure [structural elements] must be matched by the strength of the emotions? Like a strong current of water is needed to move larger rocks, where very delicate energies would be used to create a toothpick structure.

ancillary thoughts:
can/do advertisers manufacture meaning [more correctly emotional/motivational responses] in other people?

Would being absolutely intellectual correlate with being 'depressed'?
ie. going through the motions without feeling.

Structural forms that bear weight or pressure have a kind of torque meaning applied to them.

Do some forms of sensory input seem more strongly [completely?] either emotional or conversely intellectual?
tactile touch could be quite intellectual, whereas warmth, wet, chill would seem to lean more emotionally.
Color vision seems to me to lean emotionally, but we have to build up the structural/intellectual interpretation as the 'meaning' behind it.
Smell seems difficult to be purely intellectual without really working at it.
Taste seems available to more intellectual interpretation.
Not sure how i would place hearing on any gradient between intellect & emotion.

(This is the kind of things that old people think about when they have nothing else to occupy their time.)