What is the difference between a material-physical baseball and the word-sign baseball? Are they not two different versions of the same thing? You can "do" things with both of them. There are ways in which each one depends on the other for certain experiential phenomena. We certainly cannot "talk" or "write" about the one without the other?
So, perhaps what's important is that when it comes to the interaction of two or more human subjects in relation to a baseball, the material-physical object and the word-sign object are equally important/valuable/valid? Although, two people can share a game of catch without a word, and could ostensibly know or intuit what to do with the material-physical object without any familiarity with the word-sign. Likewise, two people could share a book, or independently read a book, that employs the word-sign without any familiarity with the material-physical object.
Are both a kind of object and a kind of sign. Is anything not a sign? I'm interested in breaking down the clear distinction between material objects and the signs we supposedly "use" to communicated things about the material objects. Are the signs not also material objects, and are the material objects not also signs?
0 comments:
Post a Comment