If we can't all agree on names how can we talk about anything?
This has been a reoccuring theme for me in other topics so I felt compelled to start a thread to discuss it a little, and iron out some of my own thinking on it. I'd really appreciate any examples folks have which relate, or whatever other insights folks may have.
I think a lot of us tend to get so caught up in labels, and the presumption of understanding which often goes with them, that we miss the actual thing itself. This relates to an idea that knowledge easily obfuscates learning. One of the things I took away from my TESL courses was how language acquisition is very functional in orientation, but more importantly, is an ongoing
process of development.
The terms serve to mark ideas based on functional needs; in Aikido practice, this means that all that matters, ultimately, is how the terms help us learn, but a problem arises when two different sets of terms/semantics get introduced to the situation (and we cannot always readily perceive the semantic differences). Translation becomes necessary to share the ideas and in an organic situation like a casual conversation over the internet, this demands a lot of trying to read between the lines to avoid getting caught up on the superficial terms, and arrive at an understanding of the actual semantics involved...reaching past the superficial bits to arrive at meaningful dialogue...verbal Aikido, as it were.
Anyhow, my dose of too much thinking for the day, shared with you all.
P.S. Some fun (for some of us
) reading: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/meaning/#TwoKinTheMea