How Orwell Foresaw the Disintegration of Our Language
If he was upset back then, just think of how he'd feel about our language today. He obviously saw the trend but I disagree with him about using metaphors. We can use common metaphors, simple metaphors and Real metaphoric examples. I think they are important. But I do agree that politicians use disingenuous metaphors at best and one's that make no sense...reference what we hear from the likes of Nancy P. and others well known for their lunacy.
I also agree that using words that have crept into our language that have had or have more than one meaning or reference are probably not the way to go.
I like specific words but have had a problem between old speak, which I am attracted and modern speak; but I too, should probably choose simple direct language more often.
I have coined today's confounded language as Progressive Speak, because it usually means just the opposite of what we know or think and usually just to make us think the speaker is more intelligent than they really are.
As Gulchers and writers...what do you think of today's use of the English language and have you chosen your words: carefully, to make you look smart or just never thought of what words your using at all.
I also agree that using words that have crept into our language that have had or have more than one meaning or reference are probably not the way to go.
I like specific words but have had a problem between old speak, which I am attracted and modern speak; but I too, should probably choose simple direct language more often.
I have coined today's confounded language as Progressive Speak, because it usually means just the opposite of what we know or think and usually just to make us think the speaker is more intelligent than they really are.
As Gulchers and writers...what do you think of today's use of the English language and have you chosen your words: carefully, to make you look smart or just never thought of what words your using at all.
Take the word “rights,” for example. In a discussion on political philosophy, it probably refers to “fundamental rights.” But the same word is more usually tied to derived rights, such as a right to a particular piece of property or service. Progressives have been very adept at transferring the notion that all people have certain rights (like life, liberty, etc.) from fundamental to derived rights. For people who don’t take the time and effort to make the distinction, they are happy to believe that if you have the right to life, then you have the right to any of the things (like food, shelter or medical care) that help make life possible. Rand had it right when she carefully defined “fundamental rights” as a “freedom of action in a social context.”
Rand had the same problem with the word “selfish.” She carefully defined what she meant by this word, but most people seem incapable of separating that from the more idiomatic uses that suggest behaviors such as bullying or carry connotations of running rough shod over other people’s rights.
One of the strengths of Objectivism is the importance of thinking conceptually. Most of the current educational establishment doesn’t seem to place a high value on that.
Instead of "selfish", you've probably observed me using my own word: "Celfish". Denoting accountability to one's self like each cell in our bodies being totally responsible for it's own survival.
If we look at all the self responsible cells in our bodies as a community equaling an individual called human, then we are responsible for our own happiness too.