How can we know that everyone would agree on the conditions of realization of a description? I guess the description has to be without any explanations or interpretations of what is going on? Just a factual description of what can be seen and heard in a video.
So let's say: there's a cat on the table and a man next to the table that says: "get off the table!" The cat then gets off the table.
Does this meet the criteria of being a video-desctiption? Would it fail to be one, if I said: "the cat then gets off the table BECAUSE the man told it to."
Very good point. You're right about video description - that is the gold standard of something everyone would agree on. And of course, cats and mats are fabulous philosophical examples for grasping the foundation of a concept, though as soon as we get into the workings of an organization, it becomes a little more complicated. And even this example is more complicated than it seems at first!
You raise a really key point with "because" - you're right, there is much more room for dispute there. The amount of room for dispute depends on the context. This is the added layer of complexity in understanding this definition of "objectivity" - "because" is definitely something good to listen for, a place where there would quite likely be room for a client to be interpreting something in a way that isn't necessarily the only way, but how much this is someone reading something into a situation and how much of it is something we would accept as "objective" information that everyone would agree on really depends on the situation.
This gets us to James's concept that each time a word is used, it is being used differently than it ever has before. The meaning of each use is unique, though there are general guidelines as what counts as the proper use of a word.
So there really is no such thing as a statement that can always be said to meet or to not meet the status of "video description" because so much of it depends on the specific context of the statement, what that word means at that time.
How can we know that everyone would agree on the conditions of realization of a description? I guess the description has to be without any explanations or interpretations of what is going on? Just a factual description of what can be seen and heard in a video.
So let's say: there's a cat on the table and a man next to the table that says: "get off the table!" The cat then gets off the table.
Does this meet the criteria of being a video-desctiption? Would it fail to be one, if I said: "the cat then gets off the table BECAUSE the man told it to."
Am I very far off?
Very good point. You're right about video description - that is the gold standard of something everyone would agree on. And of course, cats and mats are fabulous philosophical examples for grasping the foundation of a concept, though as soon as we get into the workings of an organization, it becomes a little more complicated. And even this example is more complicated than it seems at first!
You raise a really key point with "because" - you're right, there is much more room for dispute there. The amount of room for dispute depends on the context. This is the added layer of complexity in understanding this definition of "objectivity" - "because" is definitely something good to listen for, a place where there would quite likely be room for a client to be interpreting something in a way that isn't necessarily the only way, but how much this is someone reading something into a situation and how much of it is something we would accept as "objective" information that everyone would agree on really depends on the situation.
This gets us to James's concept that each time a word is used, it is being used differently than it ever has before. The meaning of each use is unique, though there are general guidelines as what counts as the proper use of a word.
So there really is no such thing as a statement that can always be said to meet or to not meet the status of "video description" because so much of it depends on the specific context of the statement, what that word means at that time.