The laws of description is that which would unfold the world for One, and layout all elements thereof. - Not theorization or thinking, so the laws of description will not layout a perfect theory of all science / explain all phenomena.
A different way to say it could be: People can have different understandings of each word, taking into account the laws of description would ensure no misunderstandings. - referal.
- but in the world where you read this, this text is tied to the 'real' one.. - is there any meaning in the 'tie'?
people have slightly diffrent understandings of each word, a proper 'law' of description would not have this issues, as everything is defined in its denotation..
- The dot vs the word..
intentionality making it hard to find all the dots''?
In a somewhat similar way to how physicists find new particles or other physical phenomena by looking at the movements of
If I can denote anything as a dot, that means my denotions can be as 'flexible' as the things of my mind. Essentially if I learn to notice and recognize the elemnts of my own mind, then I could 'copy' it onto even a piece of paper.. TR
Nothing should not be considered a 'thing' because it is impossible to describe a moment with it. As nothing is the answer to a question and not a sensible impression by the world.
Is math an extremely precise language?
All meanings are decided by exprience,, but in today's math-ridden world, meanings are still not fully discovered by
An additional argument:
If you could see the world in all its details, I believe, you wouldn't be able to write about any idea exhaustively without finding details that your idea omits. Each little detail could have a million smaller details inside it. A proper notation/
If someone could see everything on your mind, would they notice only the things you are actively using your attention on, or wouldn't they also notice every single piece of your mind...