I do actually think marxists should be careful when they throw out "materialist". It will absolutely flummox libs every time. Know your audience folks.
I agree and disagree. Or maybe I agree but want to disagree. the materialist versus idealist divide is such a basic and important concept in philosophy that I feel like anyone should at least understand that the words have different meanings in that context. but getting people to understand that words are just tenuous representations of concepts is a hard sell.
other problematic words are fetishism and reactionary
You'd think this would be an easy one considering we're already primed to different definitions of the word fetish. Everyone knows that a fetish can be a trinket believed to have some kind of magic power. But somehow they still get hung up on it.
And yeah I've had a couple of arguments where people get hung up on the word reactionary and just go "nope, you must not own a dictionary" when I explain the definition I'm using lol
gonna be honest - most people think fetishism is an accusation that they're into some weird stuff of the horny kind. the origins of the word have been lost, much as with materialism.
I've never heard fetishism used in the magic item co text and I'm your garden variety precocious nerd, voracious reader, some interest in fantasy/sci-fi type
I felt like I shouldn't specify "this is a word which has a specific definition" for the third time in the post, hoping A: the reader would get it by then, and B: the way I explained materialism in contrast to idealism would provide enough context to anchor the specific definition of the word being used. In my defense, if you search wikipedia for "Materialism" it goes straight to the philosophical definition with no disambiguan page.
Really unfortunate linguistic clusterfuck here.
I do actually think marxists should be careful when they throw out "materialist". It will absolutely flummox libs every time. Know your audience folks.
I agree and disagree. Or maybe I agree but want to disagree. the materialist versus idealist divide is such a basic and important concept in philosophy that I feel like anyone should at least understand that the words have different meanings in that context. but getting people to understand that words are just tenuous representations of concepts is a hard sell.
other problematic words are fetishism and reactionary
You'd think this would be an easy one considering we're already primed to different definitions of the word fetish. Everyone knows that a fetish can be a trinket believed to have some kind of magic power. But somehow they still get hung up on it.
And yeah I've had a couple of arguments where people get hung up on the word reactionary and just go "nope, you must not own a dictionary" when I explain the definition I'm using lol
gonna be honest - most people think fetishism is an accusation that they're into some weird stuff of the horny kind. the origins of the word have been lost, much as with materialism.
Do they?
I wish, I swear to God I can't mention a magic item in my Werewolf game without my players howling with laughter
character points at magic item in character's possession "That's my fetish."
I've never heard fetishism used in the magic item co text and I'm your garden variety precocious nerd, voracious reader, some interest in fantasy/sci-fi type
I suggest testing that hypothesis.
Edit: Because it'll be hilarious.
Open up a fetish shop, with the intended wares announced on the sign, and see what most of the clientele intend to purchase.
I have a Zuni fetish. Hey, why are you looking at me like that?
Flashback to that time David Rubin heard reactionary for the first time and instantly tried reclaiming it "yeah I'm reactionary about free speech"
deleted by creator
You have to explain it to them like children from the ground up. Just assume libs are drooling babies.
deleted by creator
I felt like I shouldn't specify "this is a word which has a specific definition" for the third time in the post, hoping A: the reader would get it by then, and B: the way I explained materialism in contrast to idealism would provide enough context to anchor the specific definition of the word being used. In my defense, if you search wikipedia for "Materialism" it goes straight to the philosophical definition with no disambiguan page.
I blame the lib. They saw "materialist" and thought they saw "materialistic" and it was all guaranteed failure after that.