Interesting variant.
Well, there is a two-way correlation between the combination (a sequence of digits, or more generally, alphanumeric characters) and the physical manipulations of the physical mechanism that opens the lock. From the combo I can learn about the locking mechanism and what it takes to open it, and vice versa. Here we have a symmetrical relation between an abstract object (the sequence of characters) and a physical object.
No genuine intentionality (aboutness, object-directedness) here for reasons already give in the O. P.
And then there is my memory of the combo (e.g. SHTF2024) and the combo. They are obviously not the same. In this case there is genuine intentionality but the relation is not symmetrical. The memory is of the combo, but the combo is not of the memory.
What can you say about combination locks, where the key is IN your mind?
Interesting variant.
Well, there is a two-way correlation between the combination (a sequence of digits, or more generally, alphanumeric characters) and the physical manipulations of the physical mechanism that opens the lock. From the combo I can learn about the locking mechanism and what it takes to open it, and vice versa. Here we have a symmetrical relation between an abstract object (the sequence of characters) and a physical object.
No genuine intentionality (aboutness, object-directedness) here for reasons already give in the O. P.
And then there is my memory of the combo (e.g. SHTF2024) and the combo. They are obviously not the same. In this case there is genuine intentionality but the relation is not symmetrical. The memory is of the combo, but the combo is not of the memory.