Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I read through the discussions in this section of C-D (and, to a lesser extent, many of the other sections), I am struck by how much disagreement is founded in divergent definitions of words we use as if we are in agreement on their meaning and application.
Here are a few of the words that I believe represent/cause rifts in our discussions:
Fair: What do we mean by fair? Fair to whom?
Wealthy: Is there an absolute standard for this or is it either totally relative or totally subjective?
Moral: We apply this to behavior and to society. Some believe that morality is based on religion, others that it is determined by society, others still that it can come from the self. And all of that is before we even get to the question of what is or is not moral!
These terms and others of their ilk crop up again and again, in conversations about college quality and cost; about public and private education; about how teachers are paid; about health care and insurance; about tax systems and burdens; and many other places.
* * * * * *
We do not agree on the role of either government or individual in responding to the problems of others (or ourselves). We do not agree on how things should be structured.
But if we cannot agree on shared definitions of the words above, and others like them, then we cannot even have effective discussions about the issues that divide us, because we do not understand what one another means when the terms and phrases are used.
Common parlance is necessary for communication.
Last edited by jps-teacher; 09-14-2008 at 10:00 AM..
Reason: emphasis
Here are a few of the words that I believe represent/cause rifts in our discussions:
Fair: What do we mean by fair? Fair to whom?
Wealthy: Is there an absolute standard for this or is it either totally relative or totally subjective?
Moral: We apply this to behavior and to society. Some believe that morality is based on religion, others that it is determined by society, others still that it can come from the self. And all of that is before we even get to the question of what is or is not moral!
All three of these words, and many like them, are relative. On forums like this, there are people from the entire spectrum contributing to common threads. Various educational backgrounds, various personal backgrounds, various economic backgrounds, etc..
Because of personal experience, and circumstance, each individual has his/her own perspective of 'FAIR', 'WEALTHY', and 'MORAL'.
Unless threads are restricted to only certain people, you are not going to be able to bring the sides together. IMO
Unless threads are restricted to only certain people, you are not going to be able to bring the sides together. IMO
LOL, maybe we should add the word "debate" to the list. Americans have recently developed the idea that debates are supposed to bring people together. I've heard this a few times lately--when did we start thinking this way?
I think one of the biggest reasons we disagree about policies, politics, society, etc, is _because_ everyone has a different definition of fair, wealthy, and moral.
A lot of people mistake mores for morals. There is a distinct and important difference between the two.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
