Exercise for “Extensions and Intensions”
Give an intensional definition for each of the following words:
- Shoe
- Hope
- Wire
- Green
- Politician
- Apple
Now rank them from easiest to define to hardest.
Describe how you would give an extensional definition of the same words:
- Shoe
- Hope
- Wire
- Green
- Politician
- Apple
Again, rank them from easiest to hardest.
Are the two lists the same? If not, what tends to make something easier to define intensionally than extensionally and vice versa?
You can share your answers in the comments. I'm interested in seeing how similarly people think of these things. Please make suggestions as to how this could be improved or augmented and what to do the same/differently in future exercises. My current plan is to do more from the sequence "A Human's Guide to Words." This post will be edited in response to suggestions.
There's a cultural difference. The image a kind needs to cultivate is different from that of a modern senator; so is the way they go about doing it. So is the way they prepare for and obtain their power. And the connotations I've picked up for them differ somewhat too. Politician implies semi-concealed corruption. King implies either noble righteousness or really obvious corruption.
Interesting. Thanks for unpacking that.
For my own part, while I share what I think is the meaning of "politician" you are working with here, I seem to also have a distinct meaning for it which is just someone who primarily achieves their ends via manipulation of group hierarchies. (In that sense, for example, I often talk about some managers being politicians while others are technicians.)