Tornado Strikes Junkyard. Builds Working Automobile
Sept 6, 2019 20:20:32 GMT
goz and faustus5 like this
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 6, 2019 20:20:32 GMT
I leave definitions and the meaning of words to dictionaries, Arlon - you know, those pesky things you argue with - 'and win'?
Lofty and admirable the goal of everyone everywhere always meaning exactly the same thing with their terms, it is not practical with many of the terms in much controversy. It might be easy for everyone to agree what a "tuning fork" is, but the definition of a "Christian" is too controversial to expect meanings to align across all speakers.
In general terms it is quite easy to define what a Christian is even though some, as Arlon has helpfully demonstrated a few times in the past, are guilty by being too prescriptive employing the Scotsman fallacy. The only really controversial definition of the term I have seen for a while has been on this thread by asserting that Christians are akin to atheists or cannot be said to follow a moral code!
FilmFlaneur expects to solve the problem by means of his authority (he has no wits), however his trifling and superficial experience with the real world makes that unlikely. Where controversy and debate arise professionals agree to ad hoc definitions of terms. In that way there is communication. Otherwise people simply talk past each other without communicating. Obviously FilmFlaneur has never been in a professional debate, real controversy or otherwise.
Arlon, we remember, once said that he was a member of a school debating society or something similar. So that must be the source of such authority. But professionals (such as scientists, a group who Arlon holds in such disdain) do not usually exchange views using definitions created or done for a particular (ie the present) purpose. They more commonly rely on definitions which are current currency in their field. Otherwise, as we discover with Arlon for whom all definitions are arbitrary and which are divorced from facts, one might just end up making up stuff and arguing with standard authorities which prove inconvenient.
I suspect he is trying to avoid communication rather than facilitate it.
At least I do not have a continuing reputation for evasion and deflection.
I suspect much of his (and your) confusion is the result of the belief that definitions exist outside any speaker's immediate use of one. Definitions do not. What appears in the dictionary are labels that have been useful in communication especially about reality. To ignore the reality, to ignore the facts ...
Arlon's continuing insistence that dictionaries only contain 'labels' is, as had been already pointed out to him, a prime example of that which he condemns: affirming supposed facts based on a definition. In this case it is clear that not only does he use 'labels' in a very unusual way but offers his own arbitrary and very contentious definition of something which is also all his own to create his own 'facts'.
To ignore the reality, to ignore the facts, to ignore the problem at hand in order to preserve some mere label out of several labels is not useful and therefore illogical. My definitions are practical in this context and that is really the only place they need to be practical. In other contexts it might make sense to use other definitions. The definition of the word "table" can depend on whether the discussion is about furniture or a collection of data. Usually the context makes clear which is meant. Just as there are different uses of the word "table" there are different uses of the words "Christian" and "religion." To argue that his use is correct to the exclusion of other uses is absurd in adult society. Your fail to communicate because that is what grunts do when enforcing their will on others.
This last paragraph is a mixture of special pleading, ad hominems and now the striking claim that we need 'other definitions' - obviously the ones that Arlon has just made up. It reminds me of the infamous "alternative facts" phrase used by U.S. Counselor to the President Kellyanne Conway a couple of year back.