"William S. Lear" wrote:
> On Monday, March 22, 1999 at 11:24:41 (-0800) Sam Pawlett writes:
> >>
> >>
> >> yes it is a difficult question, but it is *the* question. i can be
> >> patient.
> >
> >ok. Can concepts be acquired non-linguistically? I think so. Ostensive
> >defn may play a part in concept acquisition and concept formulation. It
> >may get the ball rolling so to speak, when [a] child is learning a language
> >(contra Chomsky) and coming to acquire a view of the world ( a conceptual
> >scheme) The problem with Chomsky is that concepts like 'internet' have
> >not been around long enough to tell a Darwin story about them. ...
>
> But, Chomsky does not claim that *all* concepts are innate, only that
> some are.
>
> Bill
Part of the problem is in focusing on definition, ostensive, verbal, what have you. The question of defining concepts or anything else is a relatively recent development (not more than 2400 years in the written record of the "west." -- i.e., the passage from Plato I quoted to set this off). So the first question should be, not "How can we define a concept?" but "Why, and under what historical condtions should we want to define a concept?" or perhaps, even, "Under what historical conditions should the concept of defining itself become possible?"
There is not so much as a remote echo in the *Odyssey* of such an odd idea. Two (or 3 or 4 -- chronology obscure) it suddently becomes the life passion of a Plato.
(I would agree that ostensive definition is powerless to define concepts -- or even "car.")
Carrol