Indistinctivity

The meaning of the title of this post, and the meaning of this topic, is indistinct.

Every word and virtually everything on macro scale, is indistinct to some degree. Every word I type, or any word you use, has a general intended meaning, and general interpretation by the receiver of the words, but every person has a slightly different interpretation and understanding of exactly what any word means. So, since a word is only as good as the meaning it communicates, it will always be inexact and imprecise (to at least a small degree).

As words are combined into sentences, the meaning only becomes less and less distinct, as the imprecision of the words adds up, and the context of each word relative to other words, increases the indistinctivity of vocabulary.

Any object in this world is only labelled and categorized by vocabulary, so the distinction of an object depends on the label given to it. Since that label is as indistinct as the variances of interpretation from one person to another, an object can not be absolutely distinctly 1 thing or another. You can assume a spherical object is a “ball”, but for it to be absolutely distinctly a ball, it would have to fit exactly, the interpretation of what a “ball” is. Whether or not people realize it, they all have slight variances in their interpretation of what would be considered a “ball”. The size, material, smoothness, and roundness all differ. So for something to be considered a “ball” by the perspective of everyone, there would be conflicts of the subconscious interpretation, and no distinct agreed upon perimeters of what fits that term.

Since any given person's understanding of, that which fits a vocabularic term, depends on their subconscious memory of what is included for that term, the most distinct interpretation they can have of a term, changes slightly after every instance of encountering or perceiving that object, word, or term. After every encounter with a “ball”, someones subconscious is influenced slightly and subtly, of the extents of what would be considered a “ball”. Since memory of anything is so finicky, when considering absolute accuracy, even if 1 or 2 neurons out of 1 billion are accessed differently in future comprehension of a word (based on encountering or perceiving it), that person’s subconscious interpretation of that word has changed. This is how indistinct the meaning of a word is.

Within context of the perspective of only 1 or few people, you could have an object distinctly fit, within its label of intended meaning. If the person within the context of referring to a ball, has an interpretation of a “ball”, which includes a wide enough range of parameters, an object could fit within the range distinctly. The person’s interpretation of what fits the description of a ball would be indistinct over time, depending on their changing subconscious neural access, but at any given instance, they would have a distinct interpretation, as accurate as the number of neurons they access, related to the memory of what that term includes. So something can distinctly fit within someone’s range of interpretation for that term, but their interpretation for any term is indistinct over time, or with more than 1 person, the outlines of what is included to count as a term, is indistinct.

If the meaning and interpretation of this concept seem to be as difficult comprehend, that may be because it is indistinct.