3 of 6
3
Words?
Posted: 03 September 2012 11:02 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 31 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
Mriana - 03 September 2012 10:41 AM
George - 03 September 2012 10:36 AM

More complicated means less primitive, more God-like and less animal-like.

Personally, I don’t think humans can ever be less animal-like.  The more they try not to act “like animals” the more they do, because we are animals.  We just happen to be a little more advanced intellectually, thus we seem like we are “god-like”, but get us in the water and you might find that dolphins and whales are more “god-like”.  Depending on the species, “more complicated” by your definition could apply.  I don’t think humans can get away from the fact they are animals no matter how much they try, even with clothing.

Since we are the only species, that we know of, that has invented gods, perhaps we can be more “god-like”. That may not be a good thing, however as we tend to invent gods in our image, which includes our capacity for vengeance and sadism and for seeking power over all things.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2012 11:39 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 32 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1762
Joined  2007-10-22

For a more serious problem with definitions try “rape” and how it is defined in different societies.  Ref: http://www.economist.com/node/21561883  What else? LOL

This is the begining of the article: 

DEFINING rape, or trying to, is a sure-fire way to start a row. Does age matter? (In some countries, sex with minors is automatically rape; in others, it is not.) Must it involve violence? What kind of sex is involved? Is the victim by definition a woman and the perpetrator a man? Do time, location or the parties’ sexual histories play any role?
Views and laws vary hugely between countries and cultures. In South Africa, where four out of ten women say their first sexual experience was rape, the polygamous president, Jacob Zuma, believes “you cannot just leave a woman if she is ready.” To deny such a woman sex, would be “tantamount to rape”, he told the judge in his 2006 rape trial (he was acquitted).

 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2012 11:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 33 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04

When men are raped, their body has a way of preventing them from getting pregnant.  Thus if a man alleges rape, but has become pregnant, he is clearly lying about not consenting to the sexual intercourse.

But we seem to have digressed in two different directions from the topic of “words”.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2012 01:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 34 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1762
Joined  2007-10-22
TimB - 03 September 2012 11:59 AM

When men are raped, their body has a way of preventing them from getting pregnant.  Thus if a man alleges rape, but has become pregnant, he is clearly lying about not consenting to the sexual intercourse.

But we seem to have digressed in two different directions from the topic of “words”.

Are you a Republican office-holder?  confused

[ Edited: 03 September 2012 01:44 PM by garythehuman ]
 Signature 

Gary the Human

All the Gods and all religions are created by humans, to meet human needs and accomplish human ends.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2012 01:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 35 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
garythehuman - 03 September 2012 01:27 PM
TimB - 03 September 2012 11:59 AM

When men are raped, their body has a way of preventing them from getting pregnant.  Thus if a man alleges rape, but has become pregnant, he is clearly lying about not consenting to the sexual intercourse.

But we seem to have digressed in two different directions from the topic of “words”.

Arte you a Republican office-holder?  confused

No, if I were a Republican office-holder I would have believed the inane statement that I made.  I was just being sarcastic.

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2012 03:32 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 36 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7547
Joined  2007-03-02

Maybe it’s just me, but the word “rape” in itself sounds vile.  It’s up there with the crude word for sex, you know Fornication Under Consent [of] King.  Actually, “rape” sounds worse.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 08:05 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 37 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2408
Joined  2007-07-05

The Tyranny of Words (1938) by Stuart Chase
http://www.anxietyculture.com/tyranny.htm
http://archive.org/details/tyrannyofwords00chas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9H1StY1nU8

 Signature 

Fiziks is Fundamental

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 10:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 38 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
psikeyhackr - 04 September 2012 08:05 AM

The Tyranny of Words (1938) by Stuart Chase
http://www.anxietyculture.com/tyranny.htm
http://archive.org/details/tyrannyofwords00chas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9H1StY1nU8

IOW, if we don’t agree on the meaning of our words, then “What we have heeyah, is a failyah…to communicate.”

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 10:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 39 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5551
Joined  2010-06-16

And I’d add Language in Thought and Action by S. I. Hayakawa.

Occam

 Signature 

Succinctness, clarity’s core.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 10:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 40 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29

Pinker’s “The Stuff of Thought: Language As a Window Into Human Nature” is probably another book worth reading on this topic. I’ve never read it, though.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2012 03:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 41 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRank
Total Posts:  44
Joined  2012-07-03

I grew up here in Montreal and attended french schools, even though it was more English spoken at home since my father wasn’t interested much in learning the language. It’s always been half and half for me, yet as it is known, when we curse we instinctively do so in our mother tongue which for me is french (most of the time). As it was mentioned, tabarnak (that is the slang way we spell tabernacle) is commonly used. These words are all pretty much church related. I wonder if this is unique to quebec french. Words like Esti, Calisse, Sacrament (correct spellings I beleive are Osti, Chalisse, and Sacrement) are used as often as tabarnak.

Also, depending on the frustration of the user, you can use all of them in the same sentence, in any order, and use them as nouns. Versatile aren’t we?

 Signature 

Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 09:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 42 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

(see http://www. nytimes. com/2012/08/26/arts/music/pussy-riot-was-carefully-calibrated-for-protest.html)  German women standing up for human rights

Back on topic… People often say that some words should be banned because they are vulgar.  Well, in fact, yes they are vulgar and so is all of English.  Vulgar, in the original Latin, means that it is of the common people, that’s democracy.  The negative meaning of that words comes from elitism and so is not valid, we have democracy now.  There is a version of the Bible called the Latin Vulgate.  Commonly people speak in the vernacular, the English are ardent descriptivists and not prescriptivists (Linguists should describe how the common people change the language from the bottom… up, rather than try to prescribe changes from the top… down.  The Oxford English dictionary calls English a democratic language in that way.)  People might also condemn some words as profane.  Well, in fact, this whole forum is, this whole forum is not concerned with religious purposes, this is a secular forum.  The negative meaning in that word comes from religion criticizing the profane in favor of the divine, we humanists don’t have to accept that negativity, do we?  Banning profanity is a religious act, don’t be confused about who’s side you’re on seculars.

Language is an important part of freedom and that’s why (see http://free pussy riot .org/) the good Russian democratic band came up with name Pussy Riot, good going ladies.  If language is used to some good end, like to spread the freedom of speech idea, I don’t see why those words should be restricted, we a democrats not Putin’s servants.

(Why are some of the URL I’m posting being blacklisted???)

 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 09:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 43 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3052
Joined  2011-11-04
jump_in_the_pit - 05 September 2012 09:38 AM

...
Language is an important part of freedom and that’s why (see http://free pussy riot .org/) the good Russian democratic band came up with name Pussy Riot, good going ladies.  If language is used to some good end, like to spread the freedom of speech idea, I don’t see why those words should be restricted, we a democrats not Putin’s servants.
...

Fuckin’ A, bro!

 Signature 

As a fabrication of our own consciousness, our assignations of meaning are no less “real”, but since humans and the fabrications of our consciousness are routinely fraught with error, it makes sense, to me, to, sometimes, question such fabrications.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 11:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 44 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1805
Joined  2005-07-20

I’m serious about this people. Webster’s dictionary was part of the Revolution, words count. 

LOL Ha ha ha ha ha ha… can you imagine that???!!!!  Ha ha ha ha ha LOL he made an AMERICAN dictionary of the… wait for it… here it comes… of the English language!  Those silly Americans, don’t they know what country the English language comes from??  Who are they to make a dictionary of the language of English royalty LOL mere commoners creating an English dictionary, can you imagine the nerve, what a rebellious thing to do.”

I’m not kidding people.  Webster prescribed some words for us Americans, we Americans do not ride in a one-horse open slough, nor do we speak colourfully, nor do we do our own labours, because we are Americans and not English because we speak differently.  Don’t you know why all the dictionaries in the USA call themselves “Webster’s”, that’s because they are all trying to be part of the revolution, they are all American dictionaries of English (Ha ha ha ha, can you imagine!), and we have a book to prove it.  Merriam-Webster is the only one that really bought the rights to Webster’s original work.  And we drink the African drink too, we drink coffee, not British tea, we do not pay the British tax on tea, we are the rebels.  We are Americans, yes of course we are vulgar we are democratic, yes we of course we are profane we have Enlightenment values!  Language counts. 

That doesn’t mean the rebels were not intelligent, that doesn’t mean that we are not good people, that doesn’t mean that we don’t educate our people, the democrats made education a RIGHT, that is part of the revolution too, educated commoners.  Don’t you people understand???  Fuck yeah.

[ Edited: 05 September 2012 12:22 PM by jump_in_the_pit ]
 Signature 

I saw a happy rainbow recently.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2012 06:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 45 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3131
Joined  2011-08-15

Noah Webster wasn’t the only one obsessed with an American lexicon, so was Ben Franklin. He’s one of my favorite enlightened founders! It seems that Amicans in his day liked them some booze so Ben created a drinker’s dictionary to define all those tippling ancestors of ours. They even rebelled once up in square head land (Pennsylvania). See if one of these fits your fancy.

http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/113876


Cap’t Jack

 Signature 

One good schoolmaster is of more use than a hundred priests.

Thomas Paine

Profile
 
 
   
3 of 6
3