You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

OrphanWilde comments on In Defense of Tone Arguments - Less Wrong Discussion

24 Post author: OrphanWilde 19 July 2012 07:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (172)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 20 July 2012 06:04:06PM 2 points [-]

The English language is not homogeneous. It's only useful among that set of people who agree with that meaning; considering this is also the set that agrees with you about your arguments, the word has no business being in any arguments meant to convince people you're correct.

Comment author: David_Gerard 20 July 2012 08:03:53PM -2 points [-]

This reads like an attempt to say "words mean what me and my friends want them to mean" as a response to "it's technical jargon with a particular and useful meaning". I appreciate you don't want the term to exist, but it still does.

Comment author: OrphanWilde 20 July 2012 08:16:35PM 2 points [-]

A response to "It's technical jargon with a particular and useful meaning" would have been "Technical jargon shouldn't be used in arguing with the public." That is not, in fact, the statement which I was responding to.

Comment author: Luke_A_Somers 21 July 2012 01:52:32AM 1 point [-]

Where did you get that from? It's not in evidence from the point you're replying to.

Comment author: Eugene 27 July 2012 02:05:49AM 0 points [-]

This is probably the wrong place to talk about language, but I encourage you to look up how language actually works in the wild, both among small cultures and large populations. You may find that your phrase: "words mean what me and my friends want them to mean," is a surprisingly accurate description of language.

Comment author: David_Gerard 27 July 2012 10:37:56AM 0 points [-]

Yes, but that doesn't mean "and therefore not what your friends and this substantially well-documented academic usage want them to mean". I figured that bit was implied.