Indeed, YHAOS. You write: "Definitions, and/or descriptions, are supposed to facilitate communication, by contributing to the clarification or perfection of one’s understanding of things and ideas. Instead they are too often used to denigrate; the intent not being clarification, but attack."
Jeepers, but I think it's even much worse than that. The intended "final cause" here -- the goal or purpose -- is to destroy language itself as a conveyer of meaning authenticated by actual human living experience over long time frames within given traditional historical cultures.
To "kill" language in this sense, together with its ability to support a private culture at all, all you have to do is "dissolve" the presently-existing cultural consensus.
The Marxists figured this out a long time ago. And it is a matter of fact that they chose to include Darwinism (at least such Darwinism as such benighted lame-brains could understand) as a key component of their "public pedagogy."
And that's a big part of the reason why we have to put up with "definition contests" any time a "controversial" issue is raised in the public square.
I just wish we had more persons of discernment now living capable of mounting a counterattack to such pernicious ideas as the gutting of language and meaning as a simple matter of operational tactics: "The End justifies the Means."
But Truth is Truth, and finally outs. You can't go against it forever....
Thank you so much, dear YHAOS, for your penetrating analysis.
Quite true.. Words are what we use to think with.. Change the words and you change what people think.. even how they think about what they think.. It seems peoples abilty to think is affected by the words they know.. A small vocabulary produces a small mindset.. But a small mindset that dwells on the truth is broader than a larger mindset that dwells on other than the truth.. Because some get confused by options..
Controlling the meaning of words can herd people as surely as a corral does.. The herd fails to recognize the corral as negative.. Human language is powerful...
Is a baby a baby or a fetus?.. Are "progressives" promoteing slavery by government or promoteing progress.?.. Are democrats for a voice for the common man or for MOB RULE their Mob?... Words are important when someone changes the meaning of a word, his agenda should be considered..
Leaping Lizards! but what I think you’re right. [grin]
“The intended "final cause" here -- the goal or purpose -- is to destroy language itself as a conveyer of meaning authenticated by actual human living experience over long time frames within given traditional historical cultures.”
Destroy the language (that is, its meanings), kill the culture.
“To "kill" language in this sense, together with its ability to support a private culture at all, all you have to do is "dissolve" the presently-existing cultural consensus.”
By ‘dissolving’ the present meaning of words and terms, such as ‘property’, ‘natural rights,’ ‘consent of the governed’, ‘liberty’, ‘right of conscience’, ‘republic’, or the very word ‘right’ itself. Make your own list [smile] - it is virtually endless.
“The Marxists figured this out a long time ago.”
And called it ‘dialectics’ - now often called ‘deconstruction’. Big words for little minds.
Thank you, Betty, for yet another excellent exposition.