Comments by "Not Today" (@nottoday3817) on "Words Matter... but not to some" video.

  1. First of all TIK, pointing out a strawman argument does not make your defence a strawman. It means that you point out the inabiity of your challenger or the one you challenge to grasp the concept discussed, meaning that his whole argument is baseless. You are not obliged to challenge such an argument beyond demonstration unless, well, you want to show off. Also, nice ideea mocking people who adhere to a well established school of thought regarding linguistics. Yeah, for I believe centuries now people have argued that languages develop naturally and so does the meaning of words, and this natural development should be allowed to continue to further the process of abstract thinking. The first, and perhaps biggest, irony is that the subject of the previous video is an ideal example of this phenomenom. Otherwise fascism would mean worshiping a bunch of sticks, not an ideological current. The second irony? You use other words suffering from the same denaturated meaning. Last time I checked an organ was a collection of various types of tissues serving a similar biological purpose. Or a church musical instrument. Third irony is that if you would pull your head out of a capitalists ass you would see that in those dictionaries 'state' has 3 separate definitions. Ironically, many of the examples arguing against you pointed out the 3rd definition, 'state' as in 'controlled by the upper administrative body of a nation'. Trade unionism means unions establishing mutually beneficial relationships between them on a large scale, It does not mean they are fulfilling all the tasks of a state: defence, foreign policy, prosecution etc. And the last irony, you are chastising people for not believing the dictionary definition, but then yourself state that some dictionary definitions can be wrong. Soo... what makes you so damn sure that you are right to a point you are mocking your viewers, if the source you mention is wrong? In the fina virtue of irony, you are falling under the exact same philosophy as Wilson does in the 2nd part of 1984, where he reconsiders his memory of the photo of the 3 statesmen which he previously viewed as proof of the Partys lies: if everyone is lying, how can he makes sure that the photo was not fake, a mere forgery of past circumstances
    7
  2. Many science books start with the definition of the symbols. Why? Because it's important that the reader knows with what meaning the author was using them.
    1