Fish argues that making an idea that is truly unique to only you is a fallacy. Every idea that one has is a creation of that person’s community values. Therefore, a theory like solipsism isn’t actually possible. But, out of fear, many create the idea of a determinate meaning. This would provide a specific set of rules of language, thus eliminating that fear. Fish states that a determinate meaning is not a possibility. Language is understood through context and knowledge. These identifiers happen simultaneously, resulting in a person formulating a response. At once, a person knows the context and interprets the meaning of a statement. Going further, a sentence will have different meanings situationally. And in each situation, the person expressing their thought and the one receiving the thought must come from the same intelligibility. If not, the one expressing their thought must explain further to help the receiver understand the context of the statement. This does not mean changing words or reformatting, but rather just helping the receiver expand their predetermined understanding of the circumstances and the context. But even if a person acquires the appropriate information, they may feel even more distanced from the person expressing their statement. This is because the
Fish argues that making an idea that is truly unique to only you is a fallacy. Every idea that one has is a creation of that person’s community values. Therefore, a theory like solipsism isn’t actually possible. But, out of fear, many create the idea of a determinate meaning. This would provide a specific set of rules of language, thus eliminating that fear. Fish states that a determinate meaning is not a possibility. Language is understood through context and knowledge. These identifiers happen simultaneously, resulting in a person formulating a response. At once, a person knows the context and interprets the meaning of a statement. Going further, a sentence will have different meanings situationally. And in each situation, the person expressing their thought and the one receiving the thought must come from the same intelligibility. If not, the one expressing their thought must explain further to help the receiver understand the context of the statement. This does not mean changing words or reformatting, but rather just helping the receiver expand their predetermined understanding of the circumstances and the context. But even if a person acquires the appropriate information, they may feel even more distanced from the person expressing their statement. This is because the