Charles_F_Bell, I would like to understand what you mean but you seem to regard every question I ask as a category error, and your attempts to take me past the difficulty seem to lead me back to the same difficulty. I would like to understand what you believe here, but my efforts seem fruitless and more frustrating to you than to me. You've set your beliefs out, but I can't do you the consideration and give you the respect of considering them!
I suspect that I would agree completely with about a tenth of what you say, and partly with another half. Regardless, it would be satisfying to achieve what I've been told is called stasis (hard-long 'a'): agreement on what the issues are, what our respective beliefs are, and where they diverge. That doesn't seem to be possible now, and I count it a loss.
In short, I don't understand, I don't now expect to understand, I thank you for trying, and I hope that this statement is useful for you, if only to know why I've stopped bothering you on this topic.
I also do not regard "category error" as a useful expression, but I allowed you an opportunity to explain your use/meaning so that perhaps I could adapt in a discussion with you. On the other hand, I did define "anti-concept" and gave examples, and yet you simply blew past them, apparently not understanding, without further query.
wikipedia:
A category mistake, or category error, is a semantic or ontological error in which things belonging to a particular category are presented as if they belong to a different category, or, alternatively, a property is ascribed to a thing that could not possibly have that property.
I think this is akin to Kantian gibberish, but if you can cite an example within the present discussion, let me know.
Every primary word represents a concept, real or imagined. A unicorn is a real concept even if the essential characteristics are not. An anti-concept combines real and imagined for the purpose to confuse the real with the imagined. "Duty" as a simple, real concept can mean a voluntary obligation, but as an anti-concept it can add in imaginary concepts such as God, society and address that voluntary obligation as not voluntary. The word "duty" has been co-opted for an imaginary purpose. I gave the example of "Hispanic" of or relating to the Spanish language (concept) co-opted to anti-concept to mean a single ethnicity and culture which is imaginary for the purpose to confuse the issue of ethnicity and race and culture.
How does "category error" apply here?
