pearljammer said:
This is precisely what I'm getting at. A dictionary cannot possibly cover all of the different meanings of love in one book, they'd have over 6 billion entries. Is the generalized entry that attempts to cover them all any more correct than any individuals entry? No, of course not. @Tarheel That being said, to answer some of your questions Tarheel, of course we can communicate despite having personal meanings for all concepts and words. In society we do have certain words that are only accepted to have one meaning, they are referred to as having precising definitions and act to clear up any vagueness. Other words may have stipulated definitions and can neither be right or wrong and are open for challenge, it depends on the user or place. An adult is different across many places in the world. Some base it on age, some on accomplishments, some on the body. Communications are very difficult across the world for this very reason. People across the world with different definitions for adult are not suddenly going to conform to what Webster says, so yes my personal definition, as does many others, are important. You talk about definitions as if they were the final meaning of a word, yet many meanings change over time, new definitions are added and connotations are also to be considered. John Locke once said that 'simple concepts do not admit any definition' and he's completely right. I mean this with great sincerity... You really shouldn't just take any word from a dictionary to prove a point, it usually is much, much, much more complicated, especially if it's debated to the degree this term is. Anyhow, I'm glad to have this debate with you but it's getting quite late here. I look forward to returning tomorrow. It actually raises my interest to introduce (the debate, not one side) to a class some time... If I ever get a chance to teach English, that is. |
First, communication is the attempt to convey one's thoughts and ideas to someone else. If a=b for me and a=c for you, when I say a, we both have entirely different ideas. That's a failure to communicate. That's what's going on here. People have entirely different groups in mind when they say hardcore. That's all great and wonderful, but when we're trying to talk about a group, accurately defining them is essential. If I say lions are found in North America, and you assume I'm talking about lions when I'm really talking about mountain lions, we're going to have issues at some point. The only way we can ever talk about something without having to explain what we mean by each and every word is to use accepted definitions that are already preset. That's the whole point of definitions.
If you can't find the right word while writing an essay, you don't just arbitrarily pick a word and assume that people realize what you want to say when they see that word. That's what people do when they use the word "hardcore" for words other than hardcore.
The person I originally quoted was mad because he thought he was hardcore and the way Malstrom described hardcore was very different from him. However, the issue was not that Malstrom was wrong, but that the poster put himself in the wrong group. Malstrom is following the accepted meaning of the word "hardcore." When he uses it, he assumes everyone will apply the accepted definition, not whatever crap they want it to mean. People are assigning words to groups instead of the other way around. You don't say hardcore means this because Jake is hardcore and Jake is this. You say Jake is hardcore because hardcore means this and Jake is this.
That's why I find all this "hardcore means _____ to me" crap retarded. It already has a set definition. What you're doing is just defining other words and substituting hardcore for them.
About love: The word love refers to one abstract concept. We all know what it is when one says it. However, putting that abstract concept into words is very, very difficult. Still, love, by definition, refers only to that one concept. That concept can be broken down into various parts, but in the end, love means it and only it.
@Final-Fan: I did address it, just not directly. I think I made it more clear this time. Basically, they aren't a vocal minority. They are the great majority of hardcore gamers. They're NOT the majority of the group pearljammer is talking about. However, the group pearljammer is talking about doesn't fit with the definition of the word hardcore. It fits better with the word enthusiast (I'm sure there are a few other good ones, but that's my solid example right now).
