3 ms·
In light of my previous reply, I wonder why you think appropriation of terms is okay going one way but not the other. It really seems a bit like bullying. Why c
by abathologist 12y ago
In light of my previous reply, I wonder why you think appropriation of terms is okay going one way but not the other. It really seems a bit like bullying. Why can't the weird kid call itself whatever the weird kid chooses? It seems like the job of a bully to say "no way twerp, you can't use 'The Chief', that's only for cool kids to use". I don't know why you'd willingly take on that role.
- steego 12y agoNo one is stopping the weird kid from reappropriating words and nobody is being bullied. People are simply objecting to a use of the word. This is no different than people objecting to using the word literally to emphasize a figurative expression. To your other point, I'm not against reappropriating words in different contexts to describe ideas metaphorically. In this particular case, isomorphic is already defined in a programming/math context. You're not so much reappropriating a definition to a new contract as you're making an existing word sound more ambiguous in the same context by diluting it. I think the reason people are so passionate about not diluting this term is because they want people to understand and really appreciate the value of isomorphisms. They're not being bullies to make themselves feel superior, they're trying to protect an idea from being misrepresented.