alixtii: The groupies from Dr. Horrible. (meta)
alixtii ([personal profile] alixtii) wrote2008-02-23 09:22 am
Entry tags:

"If it includes everything, it becomes meaningless."

There is a claim I've seen being made a lot lately, in a lot of different places (but part of the same overall argument) by different people, that if a word applies to everything it becomes meaningless. Can anyone explain this claim to me?

If I say "everything is made up of atoms" does that mean "made up of atoms" is a meaningless category?

I remember having a conversation on the OTW FAQ and the language it uses, referring to what I would call source texts as "original works" and thus inadvertently imply intentionality which isn't truly there in the case of many RPF canons, in the comments of this post, with [livejournal.com profile] jadelennox, in which she said:
The jargon term "text" encompasses the idea that all objects, experiences, encounters, etc. are analyzable under the same lens is we would use to analyze the non-jargon "texts". There really isn't any jargon-free way to say "I mean everything in the world, except everything in the world from the point of view that you can look at everything in the world as a text". I'm not even explaining it well when I try to translate it into a whole lot of English words. *shakes tiny fist*
Is the "except [. . .] from the point of view that you can look at everything in the world as a text" part of her definition really lacking any semantic content?

If I say everything is about sex, or the death-drive, or the means of production, or the will-to-power, am I making meaningless statements?

If everything is X then, a) that may say something meaningful about the state of everything, and b) that doesn't eliminate the possibility that some things are more X than others, closer to the center of the conceptual web, less problematically X, while others lurk in the fuzzy boundaries.

Or am I just insane?

[identity profile] alixtii.livejournal.com 2008-02-24 12:56 pm (UTC)(link)
Well, in terms of belief, as opposed to faith, I am an agnostic.

[identity profile] http://users.livejournal.com/peasant_/ 2008-02-24 04:36 pm (UTC)(link)
That is one of the most revealing remarks I have ever seen you make. (I don't mean that in a bad way.) I am going to try to bear that in mind because it explains an awful lot about where you are coming from and why.