6 ms·
If the phrase is misused 9 times out of 10, then redefine it. That's the hacker way.
by cellis 15y ago
If the phrase is misused 9 times out of 10, then redefine it. That's the hacker way.
- dasil003 15y agoAlso, I can't help but wonder if the fallacy was named based on some colloquialism to begin with.
- abduhl 15y agoThe fallacy is named because one of the definitions for "beg" is "to evade," which is why "begging the question" can be recast as "evading the question" (although you do lose the subtle part about assuming the conclusion to prove the conclusion).
- alanh 15y agoThank you. Now I actually learned something from this conversation.
- andreasvc 15y agoYes, it's based on a literal translation of a latin idiom: petitio principo (IIRC). A more unambiguous phrasing is: assuming the antecedent.
- epicureanideal 15y agoIf we redefine everything based on what 9 out of 10 people do, what will the 1 out of 10 do that are trying to communicate effectively using precise terminology that wait... no longer exists for the concept they're trying to convey.
- adriand 15y agoIt won't matter that they can't communicate, since they will have been marginalized as pedants.
- cellis 15y agoMaybe by learning a bit about etymology.
- hugh3 15y agoWhat do insects have to do with it?
- shabble 15y agoMuch as I sympathise with this view, communication isn't about what you say, it's about what the other person hears.
- rhizome 15y agoIf 9 out of 10 people use it a particular way, it has already been redefined. What we're talking about here is the difference between prescriptive and descriptive linguistics: definition-oriented vs. usage-oriented.
- StavrosK 15y agoIf you're telling prescriptivists to stop prescribing, aren't you being a prescriptivist for descriptivism? Descriptivism lets language evolve. Prescriptivism (people trying to push it back) is part of that evolution. According to your principles, you should just accept it as the way the language evolves.
- rhizome 15y agoPrescriptivism provides the foundation for descriptivism's point of departure, and descriptivism provides for the evolution of language. They are part and parcel to each other.
- Terretta 15y agoOn the contrary, nuance matters.
- narkee 15y agoThis democratization of language isn't necessarily correct. There's a reason why we don't declare the existence of God as truth just because a majority of the population believes it. There's a reason why majority rules isn't always appropriate. It's because often the majority can be wrong. We won't redefine the answer to the Monty Hall problem just because 9/10 people get the wrong answer. If we're constantly redefining words and meanings, then why have definitions at all?
- megablast 15y agoLanguage is dynamic, and words do change definition over time. Having said that, I still prefer to use it correctly.