Is meaning defined circularly, so that to have meaning and/or be a concept something has to be defined using symbols? (Never having read Geertz.)
--- On Tue, 8/11/09, Jeffrey Fisher <jeff.jfisher at gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah, not to get into semiology. i
> was thinking of the way geertz talks
> about modeling, and this comes out in his definition of
> religion, which is
> my main work with geertz. but alan is on this -- for geertz
> it's about
> meaning. concepts. symbols are abstract representations of
> concepts, i think
> is what he says? and the important part for geertz is
> meaning.
>