5 ms·
Maybe a better distinction is how some things are "hard to define" but "easy to understand".
by cwalv 6y ago
Maybe a better distinction is how some things are "hard to define" but "easy to understand".
- PixyMisa 6y agoThat's the problem. If you can't define it, you don't actually understand it.
- sethammons 6y agoThe ol’ “I know porn when I see it” argument.
- cwalv 6y agoKind of, yes. You don't have to learn very much about law to realize that trying to codify/define everything to the extreme is a fool's errand, so we just punt and leave it up to "a jury of your peers".
- cwalv 6y agoI guess that depends on how you define "understand." There are many things I understand that I would have a hard time explaining to someone else, much less defining them. Most people who have spent enough time to master something would agree there are certain (possibly asthetic) aspects that they recognize but couldn't define. Even when you get formal, there are limitations to how expressive any language can be. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompleteness_theorems https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_incompletenes... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_theorem https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarski%27s_undefinability_th...