***H: You missed my point entirely. The issue is not what one should do. It is merely a clarification as to the meaning of words and how words acquire meaning. M: Are you using some methods learned from your reading about "clarifying?" The discussion seems "made up from scratch." Are you saying you have some field data you are systematically considering?***
What I am saying is that words acquire meaning by standardizing definitions based on shared experiences. Do you disagree?
***H: You seem to want to turn this into something else entirely. M: Still not sure what it is, so that's hard to comment upon...but you did state back to me what I have been saying...
that the words we use must sometimes be used
in precise ways according to standard or
I am not giving justification to people to call people names like you insinuated ("Now, thanks to Harv, his friends can call anyone 'evil' as long as they know what they mean. -- that's what you've been saying, Harv"). That's a ridiculous assertion.
***H:What is your motivation to do so? M: When you answer the questions above, I'll have some better idea what point I was missing. And Harv, would you please describe your experience or any claim you have to stature as a logical communicator? You seem to write pretty fluently and are fairly clear sometimes in physics but I missed any previous description of your background which could help me understand better what your paradigm is... Sorry for the imposition, but I did post my brief data after some harassment from Yan.***
Nah... But, I'll tell ya my favorite color if you want to know.
Warm regards, Harv