ronburgundy
Contributor
Does that fact that the word "shark" can also mean a human who preys on other's weakness mean that there is no actual definable ocean-dwelling entity that we also refer to with the word, shark?
Words are just arbitrary symbols assigned to our concepts of various objects and entities which have definitional properties that exist independent of whatever word is used to refer to the object.
All things that exist, whether physical objects or mental concepts of those objects have definitional qualities. That is what it means to exist. Definitions create the boundaries that separate what a thing is from what it is not. Without such boundaries, there isn't an undefinable thing, there is nothing.
Words are mental pointers to a particular conceptual space. The only reason to have a word is to point toward that space, which means to distinguish where it is from where it is not, and that is only possible with boundaries that define what it entails and what it doesn't, just like a fence defines a physical space and separates it from all other space outside it. Remove the boundaries, and there is no space to refer to.
A thing without a definable properties isn't not a thing and cannot possibly exist or even be conceived of or be believed to exist.
Theists who use this "undefinable" argument are liars. They can only believe in God with particular attributes. They just don't want to admit to the attributes of their God, because that allows critique of its plausibility. By dishonestly pretending their God concept has no goalposts, theists can secretly move them every time an argument gets through them.
Words are just arbitrary symbols assigned to our concepts of various objects and entities which have definitional properties that exist independent of whatever word is used to refer to the object.
All things that exist, whether physical objects or mental concepts of those objects have definitional qualities. That is what it means to exist. Definitions create the boundaries that separate what a thing is from what it is not. Without such boundaries, there isn't an undefinable thing, there is nothing.
Words are mental pointers to a particular conceptual space. The only reason to have a word is to point toward that space, which means to distinguish where it is from where it is not, and that is only possible with boundaries that define what it entails and what it doesn't, just like a fence defines a physical space and separates it from all other space outside it. Remove the boundaries, and there is no space to refer to.
A thing without a definable properties isn't not a thing and cannot possibly exist or even be conceived of or be believed to exist.
Theists who use this "undefinable" argument are liars. They can only believe in God with particular attributes. They just don't want to admit to the attributes of their God, because that allows critique of its plausibility. By dishonestly pretending their God concept has no goalposts, theists can secretly move them every time an argument gets through them.