anonymous on Nostr: Okay. Here's where our understanding diverges. In my understanding: 1. Data is ...
Okay. Here's where our understanding diverges. In my understanding:
1. Data is neither truth, nor objective. (Maybe "objective" in a very abstract definition, but I'm sure that isn't what you meant. That's why I call it a data-carrier.)
2. Meaning is not ascribed. It has to be derived. In the case of words, i.e. speaking - communication, by the receiver. The best we can do is for the speaker to choose the right words where a common understanding is able to express the correct intention/meaning precisely (as possible).
3. I understand why you say "[..] the lie creates reality [..]". But the thing is, it's only a *perceived reality* for the receiver only, because he is (accidentally or on purpose) misled. It is not universal reality because anyone not receiving does not have this awareness. That's why I pointed out that this creates contradictions. For example, let's say I convince you of something that's false. You believe it for a bit but then you find out it was bad information. For a while you perceived it as truth until you learned otherwise.
Now imagine you walk close to a large tower and someone in that tower drops an anvil that's going to land on top of you. There are no amount or selection of words that I can use, that change the effect that anvil crushing you will have. Reality is that the anvil will crush you. If I manage to convince you that this isn't the case, then you might expect something else, but only until reality sets in. You might not be afraid, because my words calmed you, but the anvil is just as heavy.
You might have mentioned other points, but I'll leave it at these first three for now.
1. Data is neither truth, nor objective. (Maybe "objective" in a very abstract definition, but I'm sure that isn't what you meant. That's why I call it a data-carrier.)
2. Meaning is not ascribed. It has to be derived. In the case of words, i.e. speaking - communication, by the receiver. The best we can do is for the speaker to choose the right words where a common understanding is able to express the correct intention/meaning precisely (as possible).
3. I understand why you say "[..] the lie creates reality [..]". But the thing is, it's only a *perceived reality* for the receiver only, because he is (accidentally or on purpose) misled. It is not universal reality because anyone not receiving does not have this awareness. That's why I pointed out that this creates contradictions. For example, let's say I convince you of something that's false. You believe it for a bit but then you find out it was bad information. For a while you perceived it as truth until you learned otherwise.
Now imagine you walk close to a large tower and someone in that tower drops an anvil that's going to land on top of you. There are no amount or selection of words that I can use, that change the effect that anvil crushing you will have. Reality is that the anvil will crush you. If I manage to convince you that this isn't the case, then you might expect something else, but only until reality sets in. You might not be afraid, because my words calmed you, but the anvil is just as heavy.
You might have mentioned other points, but I'll leave it at these first three for now.