This distinction could be really helpful in discussions about concepts. eg. About god(s) or new age ideas on mind. These concepts exist as types but not as tokens....as far as we know at least.(Am I right?).
I love how you're taking a solution to one problem and testing it on another! That's great philosophy! The concept 'type' really refers to the sameness held between individual tokens, and we can leave it open as to wether or not the type exists on its own, exists in its tokens, or just exists in the mind. Applied to gods (or minds), the individual gods would be the tokens and their sameness would be the type. So, the kind of existence the individual gods have would be different than the kind of existence their type has. So, they wouldn't exist as types. You may be thinking of Carl Jung's concept of archetypes. Applied here, this would mean something like that the concept of gods or minds arose from our collective unconsciousness manifesting aspects of ourselves. The real force of this possibility, however, is to show that the people who originally believed in these things did so for poor reasons. Wether or not these things actually exist or wether or not we have good reasons to believe in them now, however, would remain unaffected.
No, the type is like the kind of word it is, whereas the token is an instance of that kind. So, in the following sentence: “My son had a son,” there are two tokens of the word ‘son’ because the word physically shows up twice, but they are both instances of the same type (or kind) of word: ‘son.’ Does that make sense?
@@ChicoThePhilosurfer OHH that helped… I just felt it click in my mind lol. Thank you! Hoping it will remain clicked for the duration of my critical thinking test tomorrow 😅
Muy util para comprender los conceptos. With this video, I understand the difference between token and type. Thank you so much. Very well explained.
¡Fue un placer!
This distinction could be really helpful in discussions about concepts. eg. About god(s) or new age ideas on mind. These concepts exist as types but not as tokens....as far as we know at least.(Am I right?).
I love how you're taking a solution to one problem and testing it on another! That's great philosophy! The concept 'type' really refers to the sameness held between individual tokens, and we can leave it open as to wether or not the type exists on its own, exists in its tokens, or just exists in the mind. Applied to gods (or minds), the individual gods would be the tokens and their sameness would be the type. So, the kind of existence the individual gods have would be different than the kind of existence their type has. So, they wouldn't exist as types. You may be thinking of Carl Jung's concept of archetypes. Applied here, this would mean something like that the concept of gods or minds arose from our collective unconsciousness manifesting aspects of ourselves. The real force of this possibility, however, is to show that the people who originally believed in these things did so for poor reasons. Wether or not these things actually exist or wether or not we have good reasons to believe in them now, however, would remain unaffected.
So… a token is just a different way to express the same word? Or when the same word implies different meanings?? I’m still so confused. Ugh.
No, the type is like the kind of word it is, whereas the token is an instance of that kind. So, in the following sentence: “My son had a son,” there are two tokens of the word ‘son’ because the word physically shows up twice, but they are both instances of the same type (or kind) of word: ‘son.’ Does that make sense?
@@ChicoThePhilosurfer OHH that helped… I just felt it click in my mind lol. Thank you! Hoping it will remain clicked for the duration of my critical thinking test tomorrow 😅
Good luck!