Well I rarely blog about work related topics since I’m no expert and there are plenty of VC bloggers who are far more versed in the area (and even if my viewpoint is accurate, theirs has experience/reputation to back it up, mine is just theory).
However recent work on products with Roger and Ed has got me thinking about definitions. Definitions are one of my favourite things as they are the foundation of everything and ultimately the deciding factor in so many decision processes. What things are, or what they are agreed to be, is the first thing that must be decided before any work can be made or any path selected.
So: [ref. := means "defined to be"]
1. Definition (noun) := a statement of the meaning of a word, statement or expression.
Since definitions are (by definition) statements of meaning, they are indisputable. If I define apples to be sheep then that is my choice. You can argue that this a non-practical definition (i.e. a different definition might have more productive outcomes), but once a definition is stated then everyone knows what you’re talking about.
I am going to write a series of posts on “what is” topics. “What is a good definition?” (i.e. what makes definitions “good” or “bad,” which is actually a question of more or less productive definitions). “What is mediatech,” “a web company,” “web2.0,” “mobile2.0,” etc.
It’s been a long time since I argued about what is right and wrong, but maybe it’s time I wrote it down. I get tired of people arguing since truly I don’t care if they disagree. Thus I tend to not raise what I think lest I imply that I want to debate the issue.
Please note that the trick is to define X to be the answer to the question “what is X?” Remember that any “answer” I give can never be more than a definition chosen to give the most correct answer. Definitions are chosen statements of meaning. (Chosen because of := [they are defined to be a statement of meaning, the one doing the defining is therefore chosing the statement]).
Also realise there is a difference between “what is X” and the definition of X. This is for the reason I gave above- the definition of X is clearly the author/speaker’s chosen meaning. “He” (:= the writer) has shown you his definition so that you (the reader) can assign that meaning to further uses of the term. “What is X” has the broader sense of “what are all the definitions of X?” Now this is mostly my opinion since it is arguable that def(x) = X (i.e. X is its definition), however I disagree since I think definition has to be about choice. Define is a verb and it’s transitive (it has a seperate object to its subject). That is to say I (or you) define something else (including you). I can define whatever I want to be whatever I want, however X still is X, even if I say X := a cabbage. This leads to a debate about actuality versus subjective experience which I guess I can talk about later.
Essentially- I believe in actuality (things actually exist regardless of what I believe [hehe]) so whatever I define, things remain as they are. A consequence of this belief is that def(x) is not the same as X. {turns out this is actually taoism, but I didn’t know that when I came up with it. Pretty brilliant eh?}
This brings round the idea of what makes a better definition than another which I will cover later.
[NB: I hope people like the pun in the title. The placement of the quotation/question marks creates a joke => definition of "what is" or what is a "definition"? ]
