What the Hell Does “Meaning” Even Mean? (Without the Bullshit)

This is a profane, simplified version of part of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article “Theories of Meaning.” The goal here is simple: strip away unnecessary jargon so that people—myself included—can actually understand what the hell is going on, without dumbing things down too much. This is Part 1 of a series. I’ll come back to other parts of the article over time—but each post will stand on its own.

The One-Sentence Version

There are two different questions about meaning:

1. What does this word mean?
2. Why does it mean that?

Philosophers constantly mix these up, and that’s where a lot of confusion—and yes, bullshit—comes from.

Two Kinds of Theory of Meaning

Philosophers use the phrase “theory of meaning” in at least two different ways. To avoid confusion, we’re going to separate them cleanly:

• Semantic theory = What does this shit mean?
• Foundational theory = Why the fuck does it mean that?

That’s the whole game.

What Is a Semantic Theory?

Take a simple example:

“Dog” = a (usually) furry animal that barks

That’s the kind of thing a semantic theory does. It tells you what words and sentences mean.

Think of it like an ultra-precise dictionary. It answers questions like:

• What does “dog” mean?
• What does “snow is white” mean?
• When is a sentence true?

It’s just describing meanings. No deep explanation yet. Just mapping words to what they mean.

What Is a Foundational Theory?

Now we go one level deeper:

Why does the word “dog” mean what it means?

Is it because:

• we use it that way?
• society agrees on it?
• there’s some connection between words and the world?
• something psychological is going on in our heads?

Now we’re asking a completely different kind of question.

A foundational theory of meaning is trying to explain:

What makes it the case that words have the meanings they do in the first place?

So instead of:

“What the fuck does ‘dog’ mean?”

we’re asking:

“Why the fuck does ‘dog’ mean that?”

That’s not description anymore. That’s explanation.

The Anthropologist Example

This is where things get really clear.

Imagine an anthropologist studying some distant tribe.

Step 1: Just describe the rules

They figure out:

• Slurping = polite
• Burping = fine
• Farting = not fine

That’s just a description of how things work in that culture.

That’s like a semantic theory.

Step 2: Explain the rules

Now the anthropologist asks:

Why are these the rules?

Why this system instead of a different one?

Maybe it’s because of:

• culture
• social pressure
• history
• power structures
• evolutionary factors

Now they’re explaining the system, not just describing it.

That’s like a foundational theory.

These Two Things Are Different (But Related)

Let’s make this really clear:

• A semantic theory is like a dictionary
• A foundational theory is like asking why the dictionary works the way it does

They are different jobs.

But—and this matters—they can still influence each other.

When Semantic Theories Affect Foundational Theories

Suppose your dictionary says:

“Dog” = an animal that moos and becomes beef

Okay, something has gone horribly wrong.

Now you might ask:

What the hell explains this messed-up system?

So problems at the semantic level can push us to rethink our foundational explanation.

When Foundational Theories Affect Semantic Theories

Now flip it.

Suppose you discover that the meanings in your “dictionary” were formed in some unreliable way—bad evidence, confusion, whatever.

Then you might say:

Maybe our definitions themselves need to be fixed.

So your theory of how meaning works can force you to revise your actual definitions.

Quick Summary

• Semantic theory = what words mean
• Foundational theory = why they mean that

Different questions. Different jobs. Constantly confused.

The Skeptic Bomb

Now for the fun part.

Some philosophers—like W. V. O. Quine and Saul Kripke—basically say:

“What if meaning isn’t even a real thing?”

As in:

• There may be no objective fact about what words really mean

If they’re right, then:

• There’s no semantic theory (nothing real to describe)
• There’s no foundational theory (nothing real to explain)

Everything collapses.

We’re not going down that rabbit hole right now.

That shit gets deep fast.

Final Thought

If you take nothing else away from this:

Don’t confuse “What does this mean?” with “Why does it mean that?”

Philosophers do it all the time.

You don’t have to.