Gatekeepin' it real: On the natural condition of fandom

[Celebrim]

So you're like the people who get swatztika tattoos, and when people call you out on it, you say it's an ancient symbol used throughout the world, while also being well aware of it's current uses and meanings, and choosing to use it anyway.

No, I'm not like any of those things at all.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

No, I'm not like any of those things at all.

I, for some strange reason, don't believe you at all.

Surely this is because I've been lead to believe that, and totally isn't my own thoughts.

 

[Xenonnonex]

So in this thread, I've been happy to use the word "discrimination" and variants of it. It's a great case of a word that has evolved, quite recently, in the English vocabulary. Not that long ago, "discrimination" was a positive quality. Over time it began to be used more and more specifically to refer to unjust prejudices on the basis of race or other qualities. It makes me a little sad that I can't use the word in it's older sense and be easily understood, but English has a bunch of words to express ideas and I can work around it. That's language evolving as part of a natural process.

Only if discrimination is used in discriminating right from wrong or in a similar vein.

Discrimination of others has never been a positive quality. And should never be used with positive connotations.

 

[Celebrim]

I, for some strange reason, don't believe you at all.

There is nothing I can do about that. But God bless.

 

[Celebrim]

Only if discrimination is used in discriminating right from wrong or in a similar vein.

Discrimination of others has never been a positive quality. And should never be used with positive connotations.

Yes, I agree. But the point is that discriminating right from wrong and all the related ideas used to be the primary definition, and now it's such a secondary definition that you are better off never using the word to mean anything other than it's current primary definition if you want to be understood.

 

[Xenonnonex]

Yes, I agree. But the point is that discriminating right from wrong and all the related ideas used to be the primary definition, and now it's such a secondary definition that you are better off never using the word to mean anything other than it's current primary definition if you want to be understood.

Or you know -> Context matters.

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

There is nothing I can do about that. But God bless.

And I wonder why that could possibly be.

But there are other ways that a language can change, and that's by deliberate attack on it using terms of art to render a word less meaningful. There are a ton of words in the English language that now mean both one thing, and it's opposite. And this hasn't happened by accident. It's been a deliberate attack by certain philosophers and academics who want to render thinking more difficult in order to advance agendas. It is literally the behavior warned about in the novel 1984 where a language is being deliberately constructed to confuse thought. And it's actually happening. And in certain quarters, you can get people to admit that that is what they are doing - all for the best of reasons of course. That I very much oppose.

I'm also not at all going to let this go until you explain just what in the world you meant by this paragraph.

From what I can tell, it's a way to shut people down who disagree with you. Basically the equivalent of calling people "sheeple"

 

[Celebrim]

From what I can tell, it's a way to shut people down who disagree with you. Basically the equivalent of calling people "sheeple"

You might notice that I'm not the one calling people names. Just sayin'.

 

[PsyzhranV2]

But there are other ways that a language can change, and that's by deliberate attack on it using terms of art to render a word less meaningful. There are a ton of words in the English language that now mean both one thing, and it's opposite. And this hasn't happened by accident. It's been a deliberate attack by certain philosophers and academics who want to render thinking more difficult in order to advance agendas. It is literally the behavior warned about in the novel 1984 where a language is being deliberately constructed to confuse thought. And it's actually happening. And in certain quarters, you can get people to admit that that is what they are doing - all for the best of reasons of course. That I very much oppose.

takes a disgruntled look at his university web portal

I'm also not at all going to let this go until you explain just what in the world you meant by this paragraph.

From what I can tell, it's a way to shut people down who disagree with you. Basically the equivalent of calling people "sheeple"

I'm not Celebrim, so I can't say for certain, but I have a sneaking suspicion that he's talking about post-structuralism and post-structuralist philosophers -- Baudrillard, Butler, Deleuze, Derrida, and Foucault, among others. That's the usual suspect for people who complain that "philosophers are ruining language/truth/bananas!"

Which really irks me. Those people have good ideas. But I'm as pinko as Rak Tulkhesh is angry, so what do I know?

 

[FlyingChihuahua]

You might notice that I'm the one calling people names. Just sayin'.

Yeah, I know what you do. You get people mad by saying stupid crap, they get justifiably angry, then you run crying to get them punished because they were mean to you.

Seriously, you know the context of what is being discussed and instead discussing it normally, you continually try to obfuscate by saying "What is the meaning really?" and go to definitions that nobody has used in at least a few centuries, and proceed to "Well akchually" every argument and try to force everyone into using your definition of a word so you can... make the word less meaningful...

But there are other ways that a language can change, and that's by deliberate attack on it using terms of art to render a word less meaningful. There are a ton of words in the English language that now mean both one thing, and it's opposite. And this hasn't happened by accident. It's been a deliberate attack by certain philosophers and academics who want to render thinking more difficult in order to advance agendas. It is literally the behavior warned about in the novel 1984 where a language is being deliberately constructed to confuse thought. And it's actually happening. And in certain quarters, you can get people to admit that that is what they are doing - all for the best of reasons of course. That I very much oppose.

You magnificent son of a gun I read your book!