I would like to take this time to edify and hopefully illuminate those with access to my very small part of the blogging community.
Blogging community, if you care to listen please note that for future reference that if you intend to talk about a topic that you are unfamiliar with, or wish to actively criticize please recognize that looking up terminology you will be dealing with in a dictionary is not the endpoint of your commitment to honest discussion.
Defining your terms is important, but the level of detail present in most dictionaries is not sufficient to base a reasonable argument on. An example of the problem described can be found in the wordpress reader, while browsing the feminism tag. Every day I see posts that either start out with the dictionary definition of feminism in the topic sentence or maladroitly inserted into a body paragraph just before a long list of criticisms of said definition.
The problem, dear blogging community, is that arguing with dictionary definitions is about as useful licking a frozen fence post with your tongue. Feminism (and other topics) are often rife with nuance and complexity that require a more careful reading to fully appreciate what they are about.
Would you feel okay in expressing your opinion based on what the dictionary says about a possibly esoteric topic such as:
Quantum Mechanics?
noun, Physics.
1.
a theory of the mechanics of atoms, molecules, and other physical systems that are subject to the uncertainty principle.
Abbreviation: QM.
Huh, fascinating stuff eh? Did you see about part about the many types of quarks? How about the double-slit experiment? Quantum tunnelling behaviours that are associated with electrons?
noun.
1.
the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men.
…is somehow going to give them enough insight to intelligently comment on Feminism in a meaningful way? My new goto method for jarring people out of their sullen stolidity is linking to a poignantly concise, accessible piece by bell hooks called Understanding Patriarchy.
Of course, some choose not to look farther than the meanings of words that are easy and convenient for them and their ‘arguments’. Then other methodology must be used, including the neigh-terrible Red Pen of Justice in the most serious cases of cranial-rectal inversion.
One of the best methods for avoiding various peoples RPOJ’s is using the dictionary, coupled with other resources such as Wikipedia to further flesh out the context of complex topics that one might wish to speak on. You’ll still get your ass handed to you by those possessing specialist knowledge, but you will avoid the eye-role and exasperated sighs of those who must yet *again* give the 101 level context necessary to properly frame a discussion.
9 comments
January 8, 2015 at 6:32 am
john zande
We should call parts of the Blogosphere “Strawmanville.” The inhabitants of Strawmanville conduct imaginary battles in their heads, defining nonsense into reality, their own private “reality,” then unleash these substanceless, but grinning wickermen on unsuspecting populations.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 8, 2015 at 9:41 am
The Intransigent One
Wow, that Understanding Patriarchy piece really hits home.
LikeLike
January 8, 2015 at 11:29 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
Oooh…we could banish people to Strawmanville, the only way back would be to do your homework on the topic. :) Wouldn’t that be nice?
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 8, 2015 at 11:48 am
rww
And then we have the I believe in “social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men” (or words to that meaning) but I’m not a feminist crowd.
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 8, 2015 at 11:52 am
john zande
I. Like. It !!
LikeLike
January 8, 2015 at 11:55 am
The Arbourist
@rww
Well, rww, understanding oppression is hard and often it involves owning up to ones own place in the social hierarchy and that can often be an unpleasant experience.
Much easier to say were all equal and let the rainbows and sunshine issue forth from this day hence!
LikeLiked by 1 person
January 11, 2015 at 6:19 am
roughseasinthemed
Missed this. Can’t remember whether I have a ‘don’t go there unless you know something about it’ caveat on one of my blogs (Clouds, currently abandoned and unloved by me) or whether I add it to selective posts.
But when you get men saying, (as I have), ‘I have two female friends and they say x, y, z, so therefore I can contribute meaningfully to a post about feminism,’ it gets beyond a joke.
If someone’s writing seriously about a topic and says they want informed comments and not ridiculous drivel, it is at least respectful to look up what they are talking about and STFU.
LikeLike
January 11, 2015 at 7:56 am
The Arbourist
@RSitM
You forget though, that penis ownership trumps female narrative almost all the time in society – why shouldn’t it apply in the blogosphere as well?
The tiny corner of the internet that rejects male supremacy is liberally showered with rape and death threats for the grave offence of not taking what dudes say as sacrosanct.
LikeLike
April 2, 2015 at 4:24 pm
Homepage
… [Trackback]
[…] Read More: deadwildroses.wordpress.com/2015/01/08/dictionary-definitions-are-a-starting-point/ […]
LikeLike