Concepts are rules for dividing things into two groups: the things that fall under the concept and the things that don’t fall under the concept. So if you possess the concept “horse” you are able to distinguish between horses and non-horses. If you are unable to so distinguish, you lack the concept horse.
What about being? Is that a concept? According to the above you should be able, if you possess competence at the concept “being” to distinguish between things that are things that are not. The only problem with this is that there are no things that aren’t, as they aren’t.
A similar issue seems to come up with the concept “meaning” or “meaningful”. If you possess the concept “meaning” you should be able to distinguish things that are meaningful from things that are meaningless. But what if everything were meaningful? Then there would be no example of the meaningless to discriminate from.
Suppose I ask you for an example of the meaningless and you say “Gazblaba”. Is Gazblaba meaningless? No, it isn’t. You have just proffered it as an example of meaninglessness, and therefore it has meaning.
So is the definition of “concept” wrong?
Or is the concept of meaning meaningless?
If the concept of meaning is meaningless then so is the statement “the concept of meaning is meaningless”.
If the definition of concept given above is wrong, what is the correct one?