And are all languages (math, set theory, whistling, English, Chinese, etc) somewhat inter-translatable? I'm sorry for the broad/overreaching question.
Is this something some philosophers agree on, many philosophers? It's my predilection to equate all language on some level, maybe as tools that provide meaning for a specific area of inquiry. And since most/all languages can be translated to any other to a degree, I wonder if the same world can be understood in vastly different ways.
And that since everything is related (i.e. part of the world), no vantage/understanding is privileged beyond being better at some task.
Here is a more mathy take on my question. I have lifted this from MathOverflow for my own purposes: "Yoneda's lemma [works] like this: You work at a particle accelerator. You want to understand some particle. All you can do are throw other particles at it and see what happens. If you understand how your mystery particle responds to all possible test particles at all possible test energies, then you know everything there is to know about your mystery particle." https://mathoverflow.net/questions/3184/philosophical-meaning-of-the-yoneda-lemma/3223 No fired particle or language provides the sole description; each particle or language provides it's own interaction with the mystery, and you learn from within your known particle/language. Each language captures how each possible interaction plays out within the language. Therefore there is some kind of equivalence, and no one language claims primacy.
