{"ops":[{"insert":"The key organizing idea of the podcast was to clarify what we mean by the concept of \"concepts.\" While the notions of definitions or \"meanings\" in the usual sense of the word is useful, dictionary definitions only scratch the surface. Dr. Nosich's move in saying that conceptualizing is more than finding a dictionary definition, it is a process of developing a categorical meaning, is a valuable one. \n\nOne important question that arises from this is whether conceptualizing is tied to the standard of precision, as it suggests that to arrive at a concept you need to establish a categorical framework that allows you to describe or define a key term precisely. \n\nDr. Elder's proposition that a concept is \"an idea in a human mind,\" that does not necessarily imply any critical standard, is one that I have not previously considered. The corollary that you need to ask the use of the term rather than its meaning in order to realize the power of a concept is important. But it does suggest another question: if we consider that a concept is like a brick, that is used for constructing an intellectual edifice, then it follows that, just as the substance of the brick must be known in order to determine whether it can be used for building, doesn't the substance of the idea have to be known before we know how it can or should be used? Or is a concept entirely a product of our subjective awareness? \n\nIs not the purpose of \"concepts,\" as one of the elements of reasoning, that it must be explicitly referenced, in order to be tested? Does not the trait of confidence in reason come from a sense that knowledge must be finally empirical, as a product of induction or experience?\n\nI appreciated again those statements about dystopianism and mental health, and caught this time the important idea that a capacity to SEE the beauty in circumstances is necessary to overcome dystopian hopelessness. Therein lies the great significance of conceptualization. \n"}]}