Manx

So you're telling me that you cannot distinguish any difference, other than number of words, between these two sentences:

"Words mean things"

"Definitions of words are clearly important to ensure that there is some collective foundation to a discussion"

Is that what you're telling me? Do you honestly not see a significant difference in meaning or were you simply hoping to be snide without having a valid point?

I'll pretend you are honestly incapable of seeing the obvious difference, and point it out to you:

Communication is a function of pattern recognition. Letters grouped to form words grouped to form sentences grouped to form opinions are contingent on compatible pattern recognition from all the parties involved in the communication. We are all using the same letters, those belonging to the English language. So we must ensure that the words we are forming with those letters are understood to mean something as specific as possible across each and every participant. Otherwise, the sentences become long strings of divergent meaning and the opinions become garbled messes of endlessly questioned and never understood sentences. We have a foundation of letters that are all agreeable, so we are able to form words that are recognized as words by all participants. The next step is to ensure that the definitions of the words that are used are, as close as possible, agreeable. Without that foundation of agreeably defined words, sentences are meaningless and opinions are pointless.

Now, I tried to shorten that down to 17 words for you, but it was clearly too concise. You suggested it could have been shortened to 3 words, but I don't see how. Maybe I could have shortened it to a single letter? How about "X". Perfection in articulation.