4 ms·

If a human driver isn't paying attention to the road, fails to see a stop sign, and drives past it causing an accident, isn't it a reasonable use of English to

If a human driver isn't paying attention to the road, fails to see a stop sign, and drives past it causing an accident, isn't it a reasonable use of English to say they "ignored" the sign? Ignoring can mean failing to notice something, as well as noticing but disregarding it. Words can often have multiple similar complementary meanings. I don't think the usage here is incorrect, or even misleading.

clarkmoody 3y ago
Any sort of ticket from the traffic police will say something like "failed to obey traffic control devices," which is more of a statement of fact. "Ignore" definitely has shades of nuance.
c0pium 3y ago
No it can’t. Every definition of ignore you will find has intention in it, words mean things. You don’t think it’s important to draw a distinction between whether a robot was deliberately programmed to do something malicious as opposed to a bug which caused an oversight? Come on.
- Karellen 3y ago
  > Every definition of ignore you will find has intention in it https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignore https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignor... > to intentionally not listen or give attention to: > to give no attention to something or someone: Two definitions - one with intention, one without > words mean things. Yes, but they often mean multiple things. Very few dictionary entries only have a single definition for a word. You can't use "words mean things" to claim that "this word means only what I say it means, regardless of the other accepted uses it already has". > You don’t think it’s important to draw a distinction between whether a robot was deliberately programmed to do something malicious as opposed to a bug which caused an oversight? I do think there are times when it is very important to do that. I just don't think that "ignore" is the right word to make that distinction, and isn't a distinction the authors were trying to make at that particular time, because if they were they would probably have used another word. ...at least, that's how I read it. It seemed clear to me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - yogurthewise 3y ago
    I would say if the human driver was distracted and drove past a stop sign, he did not "ignore" the stop sign. He simply "missed" or did not see the stop sign. To ignore something, you have to be aware of what you are actively ignoring. Even in the link you provided for the "second" definition, look at the examples paired with it. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignore https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignor... > Definition: to give no attention to something or someone: > Example 1: They ignored our warnings. > Example 2: The mayor ignored the hecklers and went on with her speech.
  - c0pium 3y ago
    You should re-read those definitions. They both mean intentionally.

clarkmoody 3y ago

Any sort of ticket from the traffic police will say something like "failed to obey traffic control devices," which is more of a statement of fact. "Ignore" definitely has shades of nuance.

c0pium 3y ago

No it can’t. Every definition of ignore you will find has intention in it, words mean things. You don’t think it’s important to draw a distinction between whether a robot was deliberately programmed to do something malicious as opposed to a bug which caused an oversight? Come on.

Karellen 3y ago
> Every definition of ignore you will find has intention in it https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignore https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignor... > to intentionally not listen or give attention to: > to give no attention to something or someone: Two definitions - one with intention, one without > words mean things. Yes, but they often mean multiple things. Very few dictionary entries only have a single definition for a word. You can't use "words mean things" to claim that "this word means only what I say it means, regardless of the other accepted uses it already has". > You don’t think it’s important to draw a distinction between whether a robot was deliberately programmed to do something malicious as opposed to a bug which caused an oversight? I do think there are times when it is very important to do that. I just don't think that "ignore" is the right word to make that distinction, and isn't a distinction the authors were trying to make at that particular time, because if they were they would probably have used another word. ...at least, that's how I read it. It seemed clear to me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- yogurthewise 3y ago
  I would say if the human driver was distracted and drove past a stop sign, he did not "ignore" the stop sign. He simply "missed" or did not see the stop sign. To ignore something, you have to be aware of what you are actively ignoring. Even in the link you provided for the "second" definition, look at the examples paired with it. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignore https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/ignor... > Definition: to give no attention to something or someone: > Example 1: They ignored our warnings. > Example 2: The mayor ignored the hecklers and went on with her speech.
- c0pium 3y ago
  You should re-read those definitions. They both mean intentionally.