> I would answer "no" to this question. You're declaring a conclusion that goes against the outcomes of several pages of heavy argument. When you do this, it's

> I would answer "no" to this question. You're declaring a conclusion that goes against the outcomes of several pages of heavy argument. When you do this, it's customary to attempt to support your position with arguments. :) An only-somewhat-related anecdot. I remember sitting in the car with my sister and mother when I was young. My sister was learning to write. On this day, she asked what a fictitious word meant. She showed us a word she had written down, and then said it out loud. We didn't know what she meant. But we worked out that was playing with an idea: does the fact that we can use the tools to represent an idea (in this case, that you can form apparently words from letters) mean that it maps to an idea. As it happens, no.