2 ms·
I don't think that's a good analogy. Hammer would be a social construct if some group of people used "hammer" as a technical term for the tool and another group
by viraptor 3y ago
I don't think that's a good analogy. Hammer would be a social construct if some group of people used "hammer" as a technical term for the tool and another group used the word "hammer" specifically for tools used to hit someone. In your example everyone agrees about what a hammer is, they just use it for different purposes. That is not as interesting to analyse.
The distinction between the uses is important, because you may end up talking to one of the groups and not realise you're using the same word for different things.
- robertlagrant 3y agoSorry to hammer the point home, but I'm not saying "words can't have different meanings". I'm saying it's not useful to rename "meanings" as "social constructs".
- viraptor 3y agoYou're missing a specific property where social constructs need to not exist without people agreeing they exist. It's not just about the multiple meanings - it's a social construct if it didn't exist before. "hammer" did exist. "hammer as a description of tools used to hurt people" doesn't until people agree it does. The interesting parts are that enough consensus emerged due to (some factors) to create that meaning, how did that consensus emerge, if it's isolated to some groups, etc.