Settle a strange question: Is a watch an organon?

[Maulik]

Here is an official response from Merriam-Webster:

Dear Kyle,

Organon is frequently used as the collective title for the treatises of
Aristotle although the word also appears in the works of other philosophers
such as Johann Heinrich Lambert, whose principal philosophical work is
titled "New Organon or Thoughts on the Search for Truth and the Distinction
between Error and Appearance" (1764).

Our evidence for the word shows that it is most often used in philosophical
or scientific contexts as the definition in our Online Dictionary indicates
(the sense-divider "specifically" means that the part of the definition that
reads "a body of principles of scientific or philosophic investigation" is
the predominant meaning). That being said, the broader definition "an
instrument for acquiring knowledge" is provided to cover cases where the
word appears in more general contexts.

I've drawn this distinction to show that a watch is not an organon, and that
organon is not used in writing to mean watch. The question that you are
asking about does not relate to what the word organon means, but rather to
the nature of reality.

From a philosophical standpoint, your question does not have a simple
answer. I can't provide you with a definitive answer, but I happened to
notice that this very question is posted online at the following Web site:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...03&Main=12
143117

The comments have been posted for over a year, but perhaps you will find
some of them relevant.

Sincerely,


Anne Eason
Merriam-Webster Editorial Department
Springfield, MA 01102
http://Merriam-Webster.com
http://unabridged.Merriam-Webster.com

[SHADYMILKMAN]

i still feel that the denotative definition falls in line with my comparison, as there is no mention of aristotle in the definition, however the connotative definition has some inherent information that is to be assumed when looking up a word that I have no history with.

as far as being wrong, yes, I am wrong.




however, i also dont like how she linked this thread, and said that they posts were over a year old, when they are not. its ashame that she didnt see that this is the same question being asked to her, being refrenced by her.

denotative == i still think it can be applied, and will probably push for it now.
connotative == im 100% wrong. i can admit that.

some would say im nitpicking, but STRICTLY from the words provided in the definition, i cannot see how i am wrong. nor can i see why no concession can be made by the members of this board irregardless, thank you for your time.

-kyle