3 ms·

That's just being deliberately obtuse. I don't believe I've ever in my life heard "apologist" used in a non-pejorative sense. Etymology is irrelevant here.

by gipp 8y ago

TimTheTinker 8y ago
> That's just being deliberately obtuse. What? That's rather insulting to assume; I'm being absolutely serious. > I don't believe I've ever in my life heard "apologist" used in a non-pejorative sense. That's genuinely interesting. I've always heard it used in a respectful sense. We must run in different circles. (I've always heard it used of Christian apologetics.)
LyndsySimon 8y ago
Christian Apologists immediately come to mind for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_apologetics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_apologetics I wouldn't consider the term "apologist" to be pejorative at all.
microcolonel 8y ago
Maybe the term "apologist" is uncollegial out of context, but apologia without stake is worthy of a ribbing when the apology matures into a confirmed failure. Also why can't people have fun battling with words and bets? It seems better than revolution or fistfights to me.
- ergothus 8y ago
  > Also why can't people have fun battling with words and bets? They can, and it is definitely better than violence, but I don't conflate "fun" with "belittling and demeaning" . (not to imply that you do, just showing the distinction I am making). I can think of a few other "I won a bet" posts I've seen over the years and they didn't have this negativity associated with it, despite their authors clearly feeling proven justified.
  - microcolonel 8y ago
    > They can, and it is definitely better than violence, but I don't conflate "fun" with "belittling and demeaning". I'll let the targets... no... the victims of the world's gentlest ribbing speak for themselves.
sbuttgereit 8y ago
You mean like this... https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-65/apologetics-cs-lewis.html https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-65/ap... The person you are responding to is correct. "Apologist" may be used as you say often in "modern" vernacular English, but it still is properly used as suggested.
nemo1618 8y ago
To be fair, people such as GK Chesterton and CS Lewis are referred to as "Christian apologists" with no slight intended. But I would tend to agree that in modern times it carries a negative connotation, implying that the person is defending an incorrect or offensive belief.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

That's just being deliberately obtuse. I don't believe I've ever in my life heard "apologist" used in a non-pejorative sense. Etymology is irrelevant here.

by gipp 8y ago

That's just being deliberately obtuse. I don't believe I've ever in my life heard "apologist" used in a non-pejorative sense. Etymology is irrelevant here.

TimTheTinker 8y ago

> That's just being deliberately obtuse. What? That's rather insulting to assume; I'm being absolutely serious. > I don't believe I've ever in my life heard "apologist" used in a non-pejorative sense. That's genuinely interesting. I've always heard it used in a respectful sense. We must run in different circles. (I've always heard it used of Christian apologetics.)

LyndsySimon 8y ago

Christian Apologists immediately come to mind for me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_apologetics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_apologetics I wouldn't consider the term "apologist" to be pejorative at all.

microcolonel 8y ago

Maybe the term "apologist" is uncollegial out of context, but apologia without stake is worthy of a ribbing when the apology matures into a confirmed failure. Also why can't people have fun battling with words and bets? It seems better than revolution or fistfights to me.

ergothus 8y ago
> Also why can't people have fun battling with words and bets? They can, and it is definitely better than violence, but I don't conflate "fun" with "belittling and demeaning" . (not to imply that you do, just showing the distinction I am making). I can think of a few other "I won a bet" posts I've seen over the years and they didn't have this negativity associated with it, despite their authors clearly feeling proven justified.
- microcolonel 8y ago
  > They can, and it is definitely better than violence, but I don't conflate "fun" with "belittling and demeaning". I'll let the targets... no... the victims of the world's gentlest ribbing speak for themselves.

sbuttgereit 8y ago

You mean like this... https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-65/apologetics-cs-lewis.html https://www.christianitytoday.com/history/issues/issue-65/ap... The person you are responding to is correct. "Apologist" may be used as you say often in "modern" vernacular English, but it still is properly used as suggested.

nemo1618 8y ago

To be fair, people such as GK Chesterton and CS Lewis are referred to as "Christian apologists" with no slight intended. But I would tend to agree that in modern times it carries a negative connotation, implying that the person is defending an incorrect or offensive belief.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]