This seems like an important comment to me. Before the discovery of atoms, if you asked people to talk about “the thing stuff was made out of,” in terms of moving parts and subprocesses, you’d probably get a lot of different confused responses, and focus on different aspects. However, that doesn’t mean people are necessarily referring to different concepts—they just have different underlying models of the thing they’re all pointing,
This seems like an important comment to me. Before the discovery of atoms, if you asked people to talk about “the thing stuff was made out of,” in terms of moving parts and subprocesses, you’d probably get a lot of different confused responses, and focus on different aspects. However, that doesn’t mean people are necessarily referring to different concepts—they just have different underlying models of the thing they’re all pointing,
Yes...there’s a three way relationship between
Words (symbols, etc)
Concepts (senses, intentions, etc)
Referents (extensions, etc).
So there are two gaps where ambiguity and confusion can get in …between 1) and 2); between 2) and 3).