Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 39, No. 30.
        Department of Digital Humanities, University of Cologne
                      Hosted by DH-Cologne
                       www.dhhumanist.org
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org




        Date: 2025-05-27 19:41:37+00:00
        From: James Rovira <jamesrovira@gmail.com>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 39.29: repetition vs intelligence

Postulating an emotional motive behind a rational question is itself an
emotional, defensive reaction, and it's not particularly honest. The most
precise forms of communication correspond one word to one meaning. Since
everyday language doesn't work that way (only scientific language even
attempts to), we need to be careful, and we need to stay aware that
polysemy can easily descend into equivocation -- and point out when it
seems to be doing so.

Jim R

On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 4:48 AM Humanist <humanist@dhhumanist.org> wrote:

>
> --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
>         Date: 2025-05-27 08:30:07+00:00
>         From: Willard McCarty <willard.mccarty@mccarty.org.uk>
>         Subject: intelligences
>
> What's the problem, I wonder, with plural kinds or modes of
> intelligence? Why be defensive over other kinds or modes? Are we worried?
>
> I rather like Geoffrey Lloyd's "semantic stretch", for which see
> The Revolutions of Wisdom: Studies in the Claims and Practice of
> Ancient Greek Science. Sather Classical Lectures, Vol. 52. (University of
> California Press, 1987), pp. 175-176. The idea is applied and developed
> throughout his many books and papers.
>
> Best,
> WM
>
>


_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php