Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 8255452" data-attributes="member: 5142">Again, I have also been looking for citations among OSR and sandbox community regarding the term &quot;fiction&quot; as a taboo word associated too closely with &quot;story,&quot; and I'm not having any luck. The evidence appealed to is entirely anecdotal conversations. I can find resistance to the word &quot;story&quot; and &quot;storytelling,&quot; though typically these circles prefer using &quot;emerging story&quot; instead.A key point of equivocation is that the shift in meaning produces a conclusion that doesn't logically follow from the premises. A key word simply being lexically ambiguous, with conversation clarifying that ambiguity is not an informal logical fallacy.What has not been demonstrated or proved &quot;ripe for equivocation&quot; in the case of 'fiction' is that it has been, is, or will be used in a way that does not produce logically coherent conclusions. That a term can mean different things (as lexical ambiguity is highly prevalent in language) is not the same as &quot;the term will be used to mean different things to obfuscate discussion or reach illogical conclusions in a hypothetical conversation that hasn't happened yet.&quot; This is mainly why your sense of the problematic in regards to &quot;fiction&quot; is much closer to the simple &quot;ambiguity&quot; side of the spectrum rather than the &quot;equivocation&quot; side.So why call it a &quot;highly equivocal term&quot; then? That only adds to the confusion.<img src="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/07/cb/a6/07cba6aab385e5836a30af5b999d2b5b.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />This is equivocating on what &quot;equivocal&quot; means, switching between a possible a synonym for &quot;ambiguity&quot; (more than one interpretation, albeit ignoring that equivocal often connotes duplicitous or evasive language) and an adjectival version of equivocation (switching between meanings in an argument to reach incoherent conclusions).Simple Solution: Then don't make it a key point of your argument.If anything, to me it's an incredibly plebian and natural one. As I said before, it describes the fiction of the game as &quot;the fiction.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aldarc, post: 8255452, member: 5142"] Again, I have also been looking for citations among OSR and sandbox community regarding the term "fiction" as a taboo word associated too closely with "story," and I'm not having any luck. The evidence appealed to is entirely anecdotal conversations. I can find resistance to the word "story" and "storytelling," though typically these circles prefer using "emerging story" instead. A key point of equivocation is that the shift in meaning produces a conclusion that doesn't logically follow from the premises. A key word simply being lexically ambiguous, with conversation clarifying that ambiguity is not an informal logical fallacy. What has not been demonstrated or proved "ripe for equivocation" in the case of 'fiction' is that it has been, is, or will be used in a way that does not produce logically coherent conclusions. That a term can mean different things (as [I]lexical ambiguity[/I] is highly prevalent in language) is not the same as "the term will be used to mean different things to obfuscate discussion or reach illogical conclusions in a hypothetical conversation that hasn't happened yet." This is mainly why your sense of the problematic in regards to "fiction" is much closer to the simple "ambiguity" side of the spectrum rather than the "equivocation" side. So why call it a "highly equivocal term" then? That only adds to the confusion. [IMG]https://i.pinimg.com/originals/07/cb/a6/07cba6aab385e5836a30af5b999d2b5b.jpg[/IMG] This is equivocating on what "equivocal" means, switching between a possible a synonym for "ambiguity" (more than one interpretation, albeit ignoring that equivocal often connotes duplicitous or evasive language) and an adjectival version of equivocation (switching between meanings in an argument to reach incoherent conclusions). Simple Solution: Then don't make it a key point of your argument. If anything, to me it's an incredibly plebian and natural one. As I said before, it describes the fiction of the game as "the fiction." [/QUOTE]

Verification