Meaning is a hidden element. It is not easy to define the term accordingly. However, it is easy to understand the term from a wider perspective as defined by other people. Putnam is a renowned philosopher with wide philosophical scope. His philosophical arguments revolve around the proper definition of meaning. He argues that meaning Ain’t in the head. The phrase means that there are more attachments to meaning than what the head of an individual may comprehend. Putnam argues around concrete concepts that are useful in showing the attachment of meaning and the uniqueness of the thoughts.
People had been made to believe that stars were holes in the sky through which sunlight shined. However, people with time relaxed that it was not the case. They realized that stars were objects in the sky and not the holes they had observed. The latter argument on the definition of the star affirms the philosophy of Putnam that the meaning is not in the head. The meaning of the word star is based on the environmental experiences of the people trying to define it. The argument is clear support of the externalism perspective of Putnam (Putnam 702).
When one comes in to contact with an object or element, it becomes extremely easy for him to realize the meaning of the element. The contact with the object defines meaning for the object. It becomes extremely easy to get into terms with an object when the reality becomes part of the analysis of the object. It is proper to understand the influence of psychology in defining meaning and beliefs. As an extension, psychology defines how different people view different objects. Therefore, the different intentions by different people are likely to influence their different understandings for different objects.
Therefore, people must stick to the relevance of their intentions. Beliefs come when people stick to previous thoughts and analysis. It is a situation where a group of people set some conditions for a society dictating how such people should live and the conditions by which they should live (Putnam 706). However, that is not always the case. As time passes, people will always wish to deal with the elements that continuously affect their livelihood. As a result, the people develop their thoughts and beliefs over certain issues. The time they spend on certain issues define their beliefs. Therefore, beliefs are not in the head but in the daily experiences and continuity in observing certain elements or factors in one’s life.
In addition, Putnam brings in a controversial argument in his Twin Earth argument. He argues that the earth has a resemblance twin. It means that the elements that are on earth are similar to what is in the twin earth. He argues that the people in the twin earth have similar thoughts, and capabilities. According to him, all objects in the twin earth are similar to the ones in the earth except the water. He shows the existence of a difference between the water on earth and the twin earth. He argues that the understanding of the difference is based on the intention of the person who intends to analyze the element (Putnam 700).
However, his work is supported by Philosopher John Searle who argues on the intentionality perspective to define the difference that may exist between the water on earth and the water in the twin earth. The water may dictate the meaning of the other liquid but at some point the elements of a liquid on the twin earth may mean the existence of water (Frances 02).
The argument on the twin earth strengthens Putnam’s argument on meaning and belief. He seems to have it in mind that the existence of another earth proves existence of similar objects. However, that is not the case. Different environments are likely to define different traits on objects within the environments (Frances 04). For example, Oscar on the twin earth is unlikely to be exposed to similar surroundings as the one on earth. Therefore, at no point will the thoughts of the two be similar. There is need for redefinition of Putnam’s argument as Searle does.
Meaning is from an intentional thought. Putnam wishes to make people understand the existence of a twin earth by believing in his arguments. His intention of defining a new earth makes it clear that there exists another earth. Although, the idea bean as an intention in his mind to define the existence of the other world, he succeeds in raising a debatable argument (Putnam 700).
Searle is aware that meaning comes with intention. The previous understanding of water as an earthly liquid shows or stands as the proper definition of the liquid. If an individual could visit the twin earth and realize all the water properties in certain liquid it could be easier to stand with Putnam’s philosophy. Putnam’s intention to make people understand the existence of the other world, shows the significance of intentionality in defining meaning for an object (Searle 03).
Through exclusive analysis of the arguments by Putnam and Searle, it would be easy to argue that meaning and belief come with intention as well as the surroundings. What other people define may unnecessarily be the truth. There is need to dig on the object to obtain details that would define the object. As a result, it will be easy to understand an object in a unique way.
Works Cited
"3b. Searle (1983) - Intentionality." Scribd. Orozcoabril, 11 Mar. 1983. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. <http://www.scribd.com/doc/97933716/3b-Searle-1983-Intentionality>.
Frances, Brian. "The Twin-Earth Thought Experiments: Entry." The Twin-Earth Thought Experiments: Entry. University Minnesota, 6 Mar. 2013. Web. 20 Nov. 2014. <http://host.uniroma3.it/progetti/kant/field/tea.htm>. Top of Form
Putnam, Hilary. "Meaning and Reference." Jstor. Jstor, 8 Nov. 1973. Web. 21 Nov. 2014. <http://www.unige.ch/lettres/philo/cours/cartographier_esprit/doc/PutnamMeaning.pdf>.
