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.

army1987 comments on Antijargon Project - Less Wrong Discussion

12 Post author: jkaufman 05 May 2013 05:26PM

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

Comments (29)

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

Comment author: fubarobfusco 05 May 2013 10:28:45PM 24 points [-]

Coining new jargon words (neologisms) is an alternative to formulating unusually precise meanings of commonly-heard words when one needs to convey a specific meaning.

A Marxist may use the term "surplus value" to specifically mean the difference between a worker's productivity and wage. If they say "surplus value" to someone who does not recognize this specific meaning, that person may think the Marxist means "surplus" in the sense of "unnecessary excess". They may think the Marxist means that the worker's productivity is wasted, and respond accordingly. This may baffle the Marxist, who will point out that "surplus value" (in their sense) doesn't have much to do with "overproduction" (another word that has a specific meaning in Marxist economics).

Using neologisms has the advantage that it conveys readily, to someone unfamiliar with the neologism, that they are unfamiliar with it and need to ask for clarification. Using existing words with unusually precise meanings runs the risk of letting someone go past a misunderstood word without realizing that they are doing so.

Comment author: [deleted] 06 May 2013 08:20:11PM 6 points [-]

I don't think jkaufman meant we should use familiar-sounding words with unfamiliar overly precise meanings, but rather that we shouldn't get in the habit of using unfamiliar overly precise concepts even when we don't really need to (“unfamiliar” here meaning ‘unfamiliar to most audiences’, not ‘unfamiliar to the speaker’, of course).