RE: Is Everything Blindly About Balance?

You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

Is Everything Blindly About Balance?

in philosophy •  7 years ago 

Putting something in a dictionary is an accomplishment in it of itself. An established concept that has a LONG long long long history and understanding isn't "putting something in a dictionary". Bias, bro, that was the word you were looking, for, bias, prejudice.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

Language is living and evolves along with understandings. If some people hold different understandings regarding concepts it is not right for them to be held back from updating definitions due to the rigid 'voice of authority' among those publishing books. Books can open the mind, but they are not much help if we are tied to them in a rigid way.

As you can see from the etymology of the word prejudice - prejudice is ultimately a word that means 'prior judgment'.

Bias refers to a similar form of judgement based thought that is closed and that denies aspects of reality as a result.

By noticing that prejudice IS judgement and that bias is essentially similar - we can see something more of the nature of judgements.

Similar but not the same, hence why it's not correct to say "nature of judgements" when you actually mean specifically NATURE OF BIAS, nature of PREJUDICE. Specificity. And words actually don't change. Mandela effect. It's not the authority of Books, their concepts are found in the most ancient texts, intact. Ideas don't Grow, ideas evolve through a morphing of human creation, the fact is that prejudice is a specific form of judgement, as is bias, which is why including the general concept as to mean the same thing is not correct, because that concept has not changed and will not change, but other concepts might be constructed on them. Language isn't anymore living than any other concept, it's static. Mandela effect again.

In the subject of definitions, what do you think is wiser to err on? the clear consensus as defined by a dictionary, or some new interpretation that has no establishment and as in this case, carelessly says one thing and can mean another, and without a doubt, it means another thing.

It's not possible for my reply here to have value while you are judging so heavily here ;)

You claim, but I don't believe you. What is the problem with prejudice and bias? What don't you like about them? Is there a problem with CTRL+R and replacing Judgement and Judge with Bias and Prejudice and the work actually SAYS what it means? Or you think that by convoluting and interpreting vaguely you're doing justice to anyone? O shit I included about 3 Trigger words, bet you won't reply now because after all, what value could I have, you can judge me as without value to my face because that's the entitlement of the new ages.