3 ms·

People's internal emotional states are their own to manage. Language is a tool for communication, and we should strive to maximize its effectiveness in that cap

People's internal emotional states are their own to manage. Language is a tool for communication, and we should strive to maximize its effectiveness in that capacity. This is done by eliminating as much ambiguity as possible. Since people's internal states are unknowable, it's impossible to predict them accurately 100% of the time. Dictionaries provide an oracle for parsing language. If we're forced to consider how people might feel in response to any factual statement that we make, we end up in absurd situations[1]. I'm suggesting that we shift the burden of managing emotional states away from the speaker and towards the listener. Just like with laws (codified social/behavioural protocol), so with language (codified communication protocol) ignorance of a word or definition is your problem, not everyone else's. Don't impose your ignorance on others. If you're not sure, the right thing to do is ask "Why are you using that word? What does it mean?" not jump immediately to offense. In order to maintain copasetic (great word, thank you for it) conversations, I personally strive not to be offended by anything and expect others do the same. > While it would be nice if we could write down a word and settle on a definition for all time I mean, we can and many languages with prescriptive dictionaries do. All we have to do is collectively agree that clear communication is more important than people's feelings. The value proposition seems clear enough. 1. https://www.irishtimes.com/news/niggardly-attitude-to-word-costs-man-job-1.1258732 https://www.irishtimes.com/news/niggardly-attitude-to-word-c...

Nevermark 5y ago
Late to this conversation, you may not get this. But ... > People's internal emotional states are their own to manage. Language is a tool for communication... It is not very good communication to not consider how people understand what you say. Communication has two ends and simply blaming people for not understanding you when you were aware that a word has multiple meanings in general usage makes no sense. Also, word meanings change through usage. A non-pejorative word becomes pejorative. Ignoring that is not good communication. This is not just about "internal emotional states" but simply what the word means to someone else objectively. I.e. "internal rational states", if you will. A word whose common usage has become pejorative is in rational fact, and in any up-to-date definition, pejorative. If you are not trying to be pejorative, you achieve better communication by not using it. Even if in the past it did convey what you wish it still did.

Nevermark 5y ago

Late to this conversation, you may not get this. But ... > People's internal emotional states are their own to manage. Language is a tool for communication... It is not very good communication to not consider how people understand what you say. Communication has two ends and simply blaming people for not understanding you when you were aware that a word has multiple meanings in general usage makes no sense. Also, word meanings change through usage. A non-pejorative word becomes pejorative. Ignoring that is not good communication. This is not just about "internal emotional states" but simply what the word means to someone else objectively. I.e. "internal rational states", if you will. A word whose common usage has become pejorative is in rational fact, and in any up-to-date definition, pejorative. If you are not trying to be pejorative, you achieve better communication by not using it. Even if in the past it did convey what you wish it still did.