notes-philosophy-rationality-definitions

some words have definitions (reducible), others are like Yvain's Diseased thinking: dissolving questions about disease post from lesswrong, that is, they have a number of associated premises (things p such that if almost all of the ps are true, then the word in question applies) and associated conclusions (things c such that the word in question applies, you think that c is probably true).

this relates to the question of how do you define words in a debate. Do you use the dictionary definition of each word? When the dictionary gives multiple definitions, which one applies? Do you let each participant define words they use (that are not in the resolution statement), even if their definitions are not found in any dictionary? The 'nexus words' don't quite fit either of these, because they don't have simple 'definitions' at all (although the list of associated premises and conclusions defines them, there is some uncertainty introduced by the 'almost all' and 'probably).