07-27-2024, 08:15 AM
(07-27-2024, 07:09 AM)tomh009 Wrote:(07-27-2024, 01:52 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: These are both dishonest and dismissive interpretations that you know are wrong as Bravado was clear how they are using the word. Even if you feel that your meaning applies to the general public it clearly doesn’t apply here.
Yes, Bravado did clarify. But that is still not the accepted meaning of the word in English--and in this case, the word "corrupt" has a very specific and clear meaning, it is not just a personal feeling. In the same vein, one could start using the word "killer" for people who eat meat, or "terrorist" for people who drive cars, or "fascist" for people who disagree with me. Even if I explained my usage, it would not make those usages correct.
I wasn't calling out you, your reply was reasonable. I was replying to panamaniac and creative specifically, who specifically cited examples of the usage of the word that isn't in use in this discussion.
As for what words mean and "correctness" I don't think you or anyone has a monopoly on what words meaning or what is "correct". The point of words is to communicate. If you think a person is wrong for calling a meat eater a killer, you disagree with the point that is being made, the person still effectively communicated their meaning, which is the whole point of words. They feel such behaviour makes a person a killer, you (and I) don't. But both of those are opinions formed on the basis of our personal beliefs in the value of lives of different species on this planet. That's a much more interesting and valid conversation than declaring that they are using the word "killer" wrong. To me, it's important to talk about ideas because hiding behind definitions of words never leads to an honest and open conversation.