posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 11:18 PM
If I said to you..."how long have you been married to your garage door", you'd first think I was nuts, but after that you'd likely reply "don't
you actually mean, how long have I been married to my spouse?" And of course, you'd be right because I used the wrong word in my question. I used
"garage door" rather than "spouse". From there you'd wonder how I ever began to think I could use wrong words in common communication. What gave
me the right?
Well, many people have unfortunately chosen to deliberately misuse the word "hate". I think they do this to halt the points those with whom they
disagree --they want to stop the opposing viewpoint, and shut down the adversary's position. Traditionalists are commonly accused of "hate" because
of their antipathy toward homosexuality. But then...the word "hate" is misused here. Certainly they are "oppononents" of homosexuality, but to
assume they "hate" homosexuals is presuming much. The person employing the term "hate" about an opponent of homosexuality is presuming to be
prescient enough, with God-like qualities, to know the mind and intent (the heart) of their adversary. They presume "opposition" equals "hate".
They are committing a variety of fallacies in assuming so. One would be a "straw man fallacy", one error of arguement which diverts attention from
the main point. It is pretty effective...but very poor thinking, and when taken further, such poor arguementation collapses in on itself, and the
credibility of the speaker is gone.
I observe that the word "hate" is used by the left and other poor thinkers as their most common arguement stopper. "Hate" is used in place of
"opposition". They think that by labeling an opponent as a "hater" that that somehow proves their own point, whatever it is. They have proved
nothing. They may have stopped an opponents potential response, but they have not proved the opponent actually "hates". Hate is its own word. It has
a dictionary definition. It's use in communication follows common convention, or is supposed to.
What happens if we begin to misuse the rest of our language just because it suits us? If everyone started to deliberately use incorrect words because
of their selfish desire to stop opposition at all costs...it would undermine all communication and society. If the left wanted to change the
minds of the right on the persuasive points they could engender, then so be it...let minds be changed in that way. But I heavily suspect the left is
not honest, and never has been. The left will use any device they can use to stop opposition to liberalism...including totalitarianism. In their own
cry for "justice" the left will quickly use violent oppression and injustice to subjugate their opponents. This proves the left's dedication to
"justice" is not just at all, but, in its proper use..."force", sort of like, well...Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, et.al.
This is not to discount the illegitimate actions of the right, e.g. predatory capitalism, but an effort to call attention to the wise still left
within the left. You still have a chance to recognize your own fallacies, and be the wiser. But the use of language tricks to defeat your enemy wins
nothing. An opponent to your ideas is not a "hater"...he is an "opponent".