h definitions of phenomena as result
from correct analysis of the phenomena. Nominal definitions are mere
conveniences and are neither true nor false; but analytic definitions are
definitive _propositions_ and are true or else false. Let us dwell upon
the matter a little more.
In the illustration of the definitions of lightning, there were three; the
first was the most mistaken and its application brought the most harm; the
second was less incorrect and the practical results less bad; the third
under the present conditions of our knowledge, was the "true one" and it
brought the maximum benefit. This lightning illustration suggests the
important idea of _relative_ truth and _relative_ falsehood--the idea, that
is, of degrees of truth and degrees of falsehood. A definition may be
neither absolutely true nor absolutely false; but of two definitions of
the same thing, one of them may be truer or falser than the other.
If, for illustration's sake, we call the first "truth" _A_, (alpha 1), the
second one _A_2 (alpha 2), the third one _A_3 (alpha 3), we may suppose
that a genius appears who has the faculty to surpass all the other
relative truths _A_1, _A_2, _A_3, ... _A_n and gives us an absolute or
final truth, VALID IN INFINITY (_A_infinity) say a final definition, that
lightning is so ... and so ..., a kind of energy which flows, let us say,
through a glass tube filled with charcoal. Then of course this definition
would immediately make obvious what use could be made of it. We could
erect glass towers filled with charcoal and so secure an unlimited flow of
available free energy and our whole life would be affected in an untold
degree. This example explains the importance of correct definitions.
But to take another example: there is such a thing as a phenomenon called
the "color" red. Imagine how it might be defined. A reactionary would call
it a "Bolshevik" (_A_1); a Bolshevik would say "My color" (_A_2); a
color-blind person would say "such a thing does not exist" (_A_3); a
Daltonist would say "that is green" (_A_4); a metaphysician would say
"that is the soul of whiskey" (_A_5); an historian would say "that is the
color of the ink with which human history has been written" (_A_6); an
uneducated person would say "that is the color of blood" (_A_7); the
modern scientist would say "it is the light of such and such wave length"
(_A_8). If this last definition be "valid in infinity" or not we do not
know, but it is, never
|