Why do conservatives in debate often resort to asking "define X"? I've had that happen quite often. It's a peculiar tic.
-
-
Semantics is substantive.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Huh? Is it not important to know? Setting the table with shared definitions seems like a debate necessity.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Define argument pls
-
Define "more" tbh
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It can serve a few purposes. One: It can be used to check consensus around an idea or term that varies significantly from one group to another. A common issue today. Two: It can be used to disrupt consensus around a common term. Three: It can be used to distract.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One is extremely useful. Three is almost always harmful. Two varies a lot depending upon context and intent. Can be educational, but often is meant to shift definition solely to help one side.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Hm, I kind of thing they are, but I think conservatives (well, most people) tend to be disingenuous about it. The very different ways people of different backgrounds understand concepts like justice or equality have huge implications for the arguments they make and are open to.
-
The problem is that people don't look at it that way, but instead use this to focus on minor inconsistencies to then attack your argument instead of substantively evaluating it.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Semantics literally is substance. It's the meaning of a thing. The problem with semantic argument is prescriptivist semantics but descriptivist semantics is just fine and necessary for clear communication!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.