Libertine
Gold Member
A word is not a thing, but a pointer to a thing, A pointer to objects, attributes and qualities. If I say “sitting outside my back door is a NH TC40 Serial #xxxxx”, I am using the expression as a pointer to a single, unique thing (sometimes called a proper noun, like your name which is a word symbol pointing to actual you). If I simply say I have a NH, I am using NH as a pointer to a whole class, or grouping, of objects. You might have a thought of something blue, or, something manufactured/distributed by CNH, Inc., etc.
Without going into the epistemological issue of concept formation, nor the formal requirements of a genus/differentia there are three basic requirements for a proper definition. First is context, second is inclusion of those qualities possessed by all members of that class, and, last, the exclusion of those traits or qualities not essential to the class being defined.
In the sense that the word “tractor” is commonly used, (including, hopefully, here at TBN), the context of the word tractor was first used in the very early 1900s to apply to steam powered traction engines used for agricultural purposes. What were the essential (defining) characteristics of these types of machines?
Aside from the obvious fact they were mechanical (thus excluded horses, etc.) and driven (guided) by an operator, used in fields, etc., they were self-propelled – they moved themselves and could tow other things. But many things move themselves (trains, autos, airplanes, etc.) so, while a necessary characteristic, it is not a sufficient defining characteristic. A second characteristic was they also easily operated as a universal power source to run other tools and implements.
Are there any other necessary, defining characteristics of a tractor? While a die-hard John Deere fan might include the characteristic of green, few would include color as a necessary characteristic of a tractor. Likewise power transmission does not require a belt pulley as in the original tractors, nor a PTO, nor hydraulics. It does, however, require some mechanism to easily apply power to a broad range of other tools and implements. The original “tractors” had 4 wheels, so, is the number of wheels a necessary defining characteristic? I doubt if anyone would argue that an old IHC Farmall M was not a tractor because someone added rear duals for traction and thus had 6 wheels instead of 4. I could go on, but the point is “include the essentials” and “omit the non-essentials.” <font color="blue">And the purpose of definition is create a pointer to a particular class of objects different from other classes of objects to the end of allowing clearer and more precise human communication. </font>
So, my contextual definition of a tractor is a mechanical, self propelled, universal power source used to power other tools and implements. The closer that a particular class of objects (things) conforms to this definition, the more reasonably it might be referred to (pointed to) by the word symbol “tractor.” The further away, the less applicable it is.
Now, there may be some who object to my definition of a tractor. Perhaps you have a better definition for the word symbol “tractor.” If so, let’s hear it. But remember that a definition must “include the essentials” and “omit that non essentials.” Or, perhaps, you can think of a class of objects that conforms to the definition but that most people would not consider as “tractors” (which would mean my definition is too broad). Again, the purpose of definition is to <font color="blue">allow clearer and more precise human communication. </font>After all, TBN is a "tractor" site. If we're going to talk about tractors, it might be of some interest to define what we're talking about.
JEH
Without going into the epistemological issue of concept formation, nor the formal requirements of a genus/differentia there are three basic requirements for a proper definition. First is context, second is inclusion of those qualities possessed by all members of that class, and, last, the exclusion of those traits or qualities not essential to the class being defined.
In the sense that the word “tractor” is commonly used, (including, hopefully, here at TBN), the context of the word tractor was first used in the very early 1900s to apply to steam powered traction engines used for agricultural purposes. What were the essential (defining) characteristics of these types of machines?
Aside from the obvious fact they were mechanical (thus excluded horses, etc.) and driven (guided) by an operator, used in fields, etc., they were self-propelled – they moved themselves and could tow other things. But many things move themselves (trains, autos, airplanes, etc.) so, while a necessary characteristic, it is not a sufficient defining characteristic. A second characteristic was they also easily operated as a universal power source to run other tools and implements.
Are there any other necessary, defining characteristics of a tractor? While a die-hard John Deere fan might include the characteristic of green, few would include color as a necessary characteristic of a tractor. Likewise power transmission does not require a belt pulley as in the original tractors, nor a PTO, nor hydraulics. It does, however, require some mechanism to easily apply power to a broad range of other tools and implements. The original “tractors” had 4 wheels, so, is the number of wheels a necessary defining characteristic? I doubt if anyone would argue that an old IHC Farmall M was not a tractor because someone added rear duals for traction and thus had 6 wheels instead of 4. I could go on, but the point is “include the essentials” and “omit the non-essentials.” <font color="blue">And the purpose of definition is create a pointer to a particular class of objects different from other classes of objects to the end of allowing clearer and more precise human communication. </font>
So, my contextual definition of a tractor is a mechanical, self propelled, universal power source used to power other tools and implements. The closer that a particular class of objects (things) conforms to this definition, the more reasonably it might be referred to (pointed to) by the word symbol “tractor.” The further away, the less applicable it is.
Now, there may be some who object to my definition of a tractor. Perhaps you have a better definition for the word symbol “tractor.” If so, let’s hear it. But remember that a definition must “include the essentials” and “omit that non essentials.” Or, perhaps, you can think of a class of objects that conforms to the definition but that most people would not consider as “tractors” (which would mean my definition is too broad). Again, the purpose of definition is to <font color="blue">allow clearer and more precise human communication. </font>After all, TBN is a "tractor" site. If we're going to talk about tractors, it might be of some interest to define what we're talking about.
JEH
