[extropy-chat] Euphamism and reality.

[Russell Wallace]

On 6/1/05, John-C-Wright at sff.net <John-C-Wright at sff.net> wrote:
> Please note that no one in this discussion misunderstood to which unborn human
> entity my word referred. There was no misunderstanding: I violated a political
> taboo common to a certain stance that I do not share. The pretense is that all
> "intelligent" right-thinking men speak the same way using the same euphamisms on
> the approved topics. My apologies if I offend, but I am not a conformist to
> these particular doctrines, speech codes, habits, or taboos, and it would be
> wrong for me to talk as if I were.

While I happen to be on the pro-choice side of the abortion issue,
John has a point here. There's enough slack in the definitions of the
words involved that neither usage can be struck out on technical
grounds. John chooses words that reflect the way he sees things, just
as his opponents in the debate choose words that reflect theirs. He
does not demand other people modify their language to match his views;
he is perfectly entitled to refuse to modify his to match theirs.

- Russell