Quote:
Originally Posted by tore
I tend to think that depending on how something is defined, that may allow for it to be interpreted in a contextual way. Example, if you say an instrument is something you can use to create and play music on in realtime, then a computer is an instrument once it does that. So is a piece of grass if you can do that with it.
But I think the same way, some definitions are not so contextual. I would say a computer at the bottom of the ocean is a computer lying at the bottom of the ocean. Even if it's not doing any computing, it perhaps could if you were able to repair it and being able to refer to it as a computer gives information not only about the objects history but also it's potential in the future. It's useful and practical.
|
I disagree. To someone from the 1920's, a computer as we know it would be something completely different. To us a computer, even a basic one, is just a tool. To some of us who understand the way they operate, its something rather different than it is to someone who treats it like a magic comptuery box. To someone from the 1920s a comptuer from today would be way beyond that, it would be considered less a 'tool' in the traditional sense. They might even take it as some kind of undeniable proof of the glory of mankind.
Lets not forget worldwide philosophy ties into things too, modernism, postmodernism etc.
Simply put, I think ALL meaning is contextual. You may want to do some reading into semiotics and semiology in general if you want to make some inroads into how I think of this. Its essentially the science of meaning.