= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Normal_Anomaly comments on Sequence Exercise: "Extensions and Intensions" from "A Human's Guide to Words" - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (20)
Hm. It's probably me with the non-standard usage. I was thinking that if dictators were politicians, so were generals and kings, and that didn't seem right.
Can you say more about why kings don't seem like politicians? (I think I sort of understand the argument for generals.)
There's a cultural difference. The image a kind needs to cultivate is different from that of a modern senator; so is the way they go about doing it. So is the way they prepare for and obtain their power. And the connotations I've picked up for them differ somewhat too. Politician implies semi-concealed corruption. King implies either noble righteousness or really obvious corruption.
Interesting. Thanks for unpacking that.
For my own part, while I share what I think is the meaning of "politician" you are working with here, I seem to also have a distinct meaning for it which is just someone who primarily achieves their ends via manipulation of group hierarchies. (In that sense, for example, I often talk about some managers being politicians while others are technicians.)
That's an interesting way of thinking about it. Thanks for starting this conversation, it was fun.