Quote (thesnipa @ 20 Nov 2020 21:48)
ever met someone that hates Vodka? like if they taste a cocktail and u cant even taste the vodka because its heavily blended with lots of different things, but they make a face because they HATE vodka?
to fender nuance is vodka. it makes you an apologist to whatever he feels like. its the main reason that he's the only user on my list of posters not worthy of even seeing their posts.
yes, generally because enough people use them wrong that the lexicon accepts the new "meaning".
for allegedly not even wanting to read my posts you sure spend a lot of time thinking about, posting about, and replying (directly and indirectly) to me. you also put in considerable efforts to tell other people lies about me. really reminds me of that other user, who i haven't replied to in years, but who still keeps following me around just to insult me. you people need to learn to let go of that butthurt, it's really embarrassing and silly...
Quote (MxVivianWulf @ 20 Nov 2020 21:38)
I know how people are using it and they're wrong and dumb. Idc if it's in the nytimes or your twitter timeline.
Quote (MxVivianWulf @ 20 Nov 2020 22:22)
True. Generally through colloquialisation.
But the reason words should change definitions is because we find more utility in the definition. Here I would argue we are damaging the utility of the phrase by taking away researcher's ability to draw attention to the dangerous aspects of new religious movements. If everything is a death cult then why would we be alarmed when a new one crops up?
It's hard enough to get the normies to notice when a new cult crops up and harder still to get them to recognise the potential danger. Folks have been raising the alarm about QAnon for years and even as they kidnap children, bomb mosques and try to assassinate world leaders people see them as a joke. Until they lose a family member to the cult at least...
i used to be and think like that in the past, but the more i learned about how language changes and evolves, the more open-minded i became to embracing a more nuanced take, and (slowly) abandon my elitist / conservative / strictly lexical approach to language.
that does, of course, NOT mean one has to uncritically accept just any re-definition or misuse of a certain term, but it definitely helped me understand that it's not necessarily a terrible, dangerous, or wrong thing...
that said, i generally do appreciate good faith attempts to discuss language. it's a fascinating topic, and i can certainly see where you're coming from - especially considering my own past. obviously i don't subscribe to the narrow-minded 'if you don't agree with my understanding of this, you're wrong and dumb' approach, but it's at least a consistent position IF you hold yourself to that same standard, and don't use any words outside their current lexical definition(s). it will certainly make me read your posts differently.
regarding the original issue, i don't think there has ever been a death cult (your definition) even remotely as dangerous and deadly as trump's science-denying corona conspiracists - so the concern that calling it that would somehow devalue its meaning, doesn't make much sense - not that i bought into the simplistic "if you use a term too often, it loses its power" narrative in the first place. that is mostly used to reject uncomfortable comparisons or end a conversation.
as far as i can tell, icemage and myself are the only ones using it in this context here in pard anyway, so it shouldn't really bother you too much i hope.
This post was edited by fender on Nov 21 2020 06:36am