more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Is it true that we cannot say, non-circularly, what red is? We cannot find a complex synonym for it, but I think we can provide red with an ostensive real definition.
Gist of Idea
Simple things like 'red' can be given real ostensive definitions
Source
E.J. Lowe (What is the Source of Knowledge of Modal Truths? [2013], 6)
Book Ref
-: 'Mind' [-], p.24
A Reaction
I'm not quite sure how 'real' this definition would be, if it depends on observers (some of whom may be colourblind). In what sense is this act of ostensions a 'definition'? You must distinguish the colour from the texture or shape.
| 10019 | Only what is logically complex can be defined; what is simple must be pointed to [Frege] |
| 21551 | Empirical words need ostensive definition, which makes them egocentric [Russell] |
| 18889 | Ostensive definitions needn't involve pointing, but must refer to something specific [Salmon,N] |
| 11220 | Ostensive definitions look simple, but are complex and barely explicable [Gupta] |
| 9957 | Ostensive definitions point to an object which an expression denotes [Mautner] |
| 16549 | Simple things like 'red' can be given real ostensive definitions [Lowe] |