Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
A simple houserule for martial/caster balance.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fifth Element" data-source="post: 8599568" data-attributes="member: 48135"><p>We are on an RPG message board. If we were on a philosophy message board, this might be relevant, but we are not. Jargon has its place, but holding people to technical standards in non-technical settings it a terrible idea.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Pretending that this hasn't happened isn't helpful to anyone. The cat is out of the bag. This is how language works. You might think it's unfortunate that you now have to be more specific when describing that type of argument in certain settings, but that's how it is.</p><p></p><p>Moreover, using a term such as reductio ad absurdum in a non-technical setting such as this is a bad idea anyway. The fact that it's jargon mean you're going to have to explain it regardless, so using the term itself is not helpful. If you're going to engage in a reductio ad absurdum argument (in the technical sense) in this context, just do it. Don't label it. You're going to have to explain the label anyway, since this is not a philosophy board.</p><p></p><p>So ultimately we're not losing anything. In non-philosophical circles, you'd have to explain what you mean by the term anyway, so there's no additional work created there. And in philosophical circles, people will know the jargony usage of the term anyway, so there's little chance of confusion there.</p><p></p><p></p><p>How it started is irrelevant. How it's used now is the only thing that matters. A word's etymology is not its meaning.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Indeed, and if you're not prescriptive about them as well then you're engaging in special pleading. Words change in meaning over time. Calling one new meaning "correct" and another "incorrect" is untenable, if the basis is that the meanings are different than the original meanings. </p><p></p><p></p><p>It's very different. The proportion of people who use "red" to mean "blue" are vanishingly small. The proportion of people who use 'reductio ad absurdum' to mean 'appeal to extremes' is much, much higher. You pointed out how it started, and how it has propagated via the internet. So there are a large number of native speakers who use it with that meaning. That means it has that meaning. A word's meaning is determined by how people use it, so if a significant number of people use the word that way, the word has that meaning.</p><p></p><p></p><p>How a word came to be used in a particular way does is its etymology. Etymology does not determine current meaning.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Calling them polar opposites is dubious at best. The 'incorrect' meaning is "a fallacious use of the type of argument referred to in the 'correct' meaning." It refers to a subset of that type of argument. It is, in fact, a common linguistic phenomenon for a word to come to mean a specific subset of an earlier, more general meaning. The word 'meat', for example, used to mean 'food.' Now it means only a specific type of food. This happens all the time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fifth Element, post: 8599568, member: 48135"] We are on an RPG message board. If we were on a philosophy message board, this might be relevant, but we are not. Jargon has its place, but holding people to technical standards in non-technical settings it a terrible idea. Pretending that this hasn't happened isn't helpful to anyone. The cat is out of the bag. This is how language works. You might think it's unfortunate that you now have to be more specific when describing that type of argument in certain settings, but that's how it is. Moreover, using a term such as reductio ad absurdum in a non-technical setting such as this is a bad idea anyway. The fact that it's jargon mean you're going to have to explain it regardless, so using the term itself is not helpful. If you're going to engage in a reductio ad absurdum argument (in the technical sense) in this context, just do it. Don't label it. You're going to have to explain the label anyway, since this is not a philosophy board. So ultimately we're not losing anything. In non-philosophical circles, you'd have to explain what you mean by the term anyway, so there's no additional work created there. And in philosophical circles, people will know the jargony usage of the term anyway, so there's little chance of confusion there. How it started is irrelevant. How it's used now is the only thing that matters. A word's etymology is not its meaning. Indeed, and if you're not prescriptive about them as well then you're engaging in special pleading. Words change in meaning over time. Calling one new meaning "correct" and another "incorrect" is untenable, if the basis is that the meanings are different than the original meanings. It's very different. The proportion of people who use "red" to mean "blue" are vanishingly small. The proportion of people who use 'reductio ad absurdum' to mean 'appeal to extremes' is much, much higher. You pointed out how it started, and how it has propagated via the internet. So there are a large number of native speakers who use it with that meaning. That means it has that meaning. A word's meaning is determined by how people use it, so if a significant number of people use the word that way, the word has that meaning. How a word came to be used in a particular way does is its etymology. Etymology does not determine current meaning. Calling them polar opposites is dubious at best. The 'incorrect' meaning is "a fallacious use of the type of argument referred to in the 'correct' meaning." It refers to a subset of that type of argument. It is, in fact, a common linguistic phenomenon for a word to come to mean a specific subset of an earlier, more general meaning. The word 'meat', for example, used to mean 'food.' Now it means only a specific type of food. This happens all the time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
A simple houserule for martial/caster balance.
Top