As far as I can imagine, a description is firstly an evaluation: "x is (a,
the, very) y" (token/value). The way we humans choose to describe
something, whether it's ourselves, someone else, something from another
descriptive domain, or even our own descriptions, calls for a judgment
about what kind of value to assign to "x", regardless of what it might
really be in the first instance (which would also require an evaluation to
be established from any given perspective).
Language is a descriptive domain. It seems to me that any description,
which is necessarily an evaluation of some sort, requires a judgement on
the part of the observer as to what the thing is that they are describing
in the first place and what it will be described as afterwards. Thus, the
whole process of languaging could be described as an ongoing process of
assessment and reassessment, or evaluation and re-evaluation, or
discrimination and distinction.
As Jay points out, I guess it comes back to whose value system we use when
doing these very fundamental, distinctly human processes. Or rather, "who"
or "what" owns or designs or uses or manipulates the value system for
their/its benefit.
Any thoughts?
Phil
Phil Graham
p.graham who-is-at qut.edu.au
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palms/8314/index.html