This part is notably helpful for the understanding of differences that separate "metadata" from "data". I was writing a blog post for my weekly assignment. Knowing that data is the representation of the object and metadata describes information the data helps build the definition of the terms in my schema of knowledge. In many cases, metadata even provides resources that either give insights to how the data is collected or/and introduces possible perspectives as to how the data can be seen/utilized in the future. Data can survive without metadata, but metadata won't exist without the data. However, the data that lacks metadata may stay uncracked and ciphered, leading to the data potentially becoming useless in the fundamental and economic growth of human beings.

A pretty common theme in our readings is the arbitrariness of language, particularly the arbitrariness of naming objects. I like how Richards extends the arbitrariness of language in describing how we determine cause from effect. Especially considering how Richards and Ogden, as well as Burke, emphasize ambiguity and how parts of rhetoric are interconnected, I wonder if this is also a suggestion that to some extent any attempt to draw distinctions is arbitrary?

racial distinctions, adapt to Americans sense of self