Definitions
The concept of a definition is often associated with the lexical definition. This is the kind of definition that we might find in a dictionary.
Being asked to define a vague term can be frustrating because we:
- Assume that the question is trivial and has been answered in some dictionary
- Believe that everyone working with us must surely know what we really mean
- Wish to maintain maximum flexibility/ambiguity in how we use the term
If we have no understanding of a word and need to simply navigate a conversation or some text without abject confusion then the dictionary will typically suffice.
Generally, with experience, whether lived, artistic, scientific or philosophical, our definitions of things tend to get richer. The dictionary definition might naturally be something we outgrow and challenge.
This does not mean that definitions are pointless, but rather that we have transcended a limited definition.
A well-established lexical definition is often insufficient. Let's say that the someone important demands that our technology is made more "simple".
What does "simple" mean here?
For whom are we trying to make the technology "simple"?
In this situation we need a precising definition. This makes the (lexical) definition more precise to our specific context. For example, we might want to:
- Reduce the number of components in our system to improve our capacity to maintain it
- Hide the internal complexity of the system by developing a smooth user interface
Here, (1) and (2) offer us different precising definitions of simplicity.
The first views a simple system as one that functions with a minimum number of components. Making the system more simple ensures that the producer can more easily maintain its quality.
The second views a simple system as one that hides its internal complexity. Making the system more simple ensures that the user can more easily interact with the technology.
Many other definitions could be held in someone's mind, including the underlying lexical definition, and possibly combinations of multiple such definitions.
These nuances do not mean that definitions are pointless, only that sometimes we need precising definitions.
Arguing over the true definition of something is a philosopher's game. This is an activity of value that — unfortunately — people have little time or tolerance for in daily life.
To overcome an impasse we sometimes need a stipulative definition. Stipulating that a new or existing word has a specific definition can start useful discussions and help us move forward. If someone confuses your stipulation for a precising definition then your exchange of ideas will prematurely collapse.
Stipulating a flat world might lead to interesting thought experiments and game designs. Defining the world (precisely) as a flat planet means you are giving a false and unhelpful definition.
A geometrical axiom is a kind of stipulation that helps the mathematician get started with a proof. The value of the stipulation is the process that it initiates and its role as a foundation to a structure.
A final type of definition worth remarking on is the ostensive definition. When I painted houses with my brother he would say things like:
"Sand the architrave."
"Touch up the plinth."
I didn't have the technical knowledge to understand what he was talking about.
He would then just point at the architrave/plinth/coving and say: "That." A connection was made between the word (signifier) and the concept (signified) in my mind then I was able to do the work that was asked of me. My brother had given an ostensive definition.
Sometimes, the existence of this kind of example leads people to believe that we don't need definitions when we can just point at stuff.
Not every thing is easy to point at, however, like atoms and concepts.
Furthermore, my ability to sand an architrave and paint a plinth does not mean I could design an algorithm for identifying these and other construction materials; there I would need some precising definitions.