Quote:
Originally posted by manalone
I consider the opposite. There are useful technical distinctions in the context of specific uses of a word. These should not necessarily be propagated into the general populace. It's pointless and it's nit-picking.
Furthermore, that form of linguistic restriction attempts to create a jargon filled and cliqueish language; a distinct step away from the goal of language as a form of communication.
|
I would agree with you, to the extent thatI despise Jargonism, .ie the process of calling a spade a manual earth manipulating implement. However this sin is not usually commited by scientists, or technologist, rather by "Management Types", hence the imfamous Management Speak. Distorting well defined words into purposly ambiguous terms...Grrrr!
However, the languange of everyday communication is not very useful for defining the very precise and unambiguous world of science. This is why mathematics is quite often the language of choice. Mathematics is based on principles of absolute certainty. There is no room for misinterpretation.
The english language has however been spawned from no such ideals. It is seeped in unambiguities. Take a quick leaf there any comprehensive dictionary and you'll know what I mean! Usually this unambigousness does not affect our evryday communication, there are times when we need to remind ourselves of exact definitions of words, or at the very least, agree on what definition we are going to use for the basis of a specific conversation. Ergo, when talking about scientific themes the word theory takes on a very specific meaning, and I try to only use the word in THIS sense when partaking in scientific conversation, yet I will use the more ambigous "general" definition in day-to-day conversing.
The main reason I posted this was to either remind, or inform those who threw around the phrase "it's only a theory". Technically it's only a theory that the earth orbits the sun.