Fun interpretation of the definition of neologism.

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 07:54 PM
link   


In psychiatry, the term neologism is used to describe the use of words that have meaning only to the person who uses them, independent of their common meaning.[7] This tendency is considered normal in children, but in adults can be a symptom of psychopathy[8] or a thought disorder (indicative of a psychotic mental illness, such as schizophrenia)



When a group or society do this, its no different.

"words that have meaning only to the person who uses them, independent of their common meaning." (legalese)

The law society does this, so that would make the law society and those that write the law a bunch of psychotic schitzophrenics?


"This tendency is considered normal in children, but in adults can be a symptom of psychopathy[8] or a thought disorder (indicative of a psychotic mental illness, such as schizophrenia)"

And we are the ones treated as incompetent and imbeciles who need to be represented



Here's what is funny....

I've been working on a matrix theory metaphorically comparing the current situation. I looked up what neo actually means, interesting.

en.wikipedia.org...


from Greek νέο- (néo-), meaning "new", and λόγος (lógos), meaning "speech, utterance") is a newly coined term, word, or phrase, that may be in the process of entering common use, but has not yet been accepted into mainstream

In theology, a neologism is a relatively new doctrine (for example, Transcendentalism). In this sense, a neologist is one who proposes either a new doctrine or a new interpretation of source material [12]




If you interpret the law in a new way it's known as neologism.



How strange!
edit on 22-6-2013 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-6-2013 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-6-2013 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Wifibrains
 


Neologism has quite a following here on ATS...
edit on 22-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Wifibrains
 


I literally lol'ed. Then went to my bookshelf and piked up: "Plain English for Lawyers - Fourth Edition", I was going to quote something for you, but on opening the book I read the name of the person who owns it, reminded with that I have to agree that most are socio-paths and psychopaths to some extent. Really who else could make a profession out of arguing with people?



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by cartenz
 


I thought is was Halirious too. What is written above is proof for me that a paradigm shift is well and truely under way. My next thread is going to be explaining neologism in its phsycological form, and ending it i with the theology. The film the matrix led me to look up the word neo and other uses of the word and it's evolution. That's how I found this. It is definately a message, but I don't think it's from mku.



Sorry if you thought I was digging at you in other thread. I don't do that, i was talking to your logic on the law, that were just words on a screen, not you personally.


Hmmm, neologism, neologists, and neology. As it sounds like a society I'm going to propose it, but the emotology of the word and it's meanings has Already created it. Remember where you herd it first, I foresee it coming.

Did you escape via a society? Or did I miss read your avatar all together?

edit on 24-6-2013 by Wifibrains because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Thank you I like that word I myself invented "Progs".



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 01:55 PM
link   



Did you escape via a society? Or did I miss read your avatar all together?


Perhaps mis-read; It refers to personal enlightenment which can never be achieved with a "society"; We escape the madness by embracing reality, as we embrace truth by rejecting lies. But you know this already, you just took your eye off the ball for a moment.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Wifibrains
 


I'll make a deal with you:

I watch the (3) Matrix movies if you read all 192 pages of the Meads judgement:
www.canlii.ca...

For me that is a large undertaking; Deal?

This is about sharing understanding.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 02:16 PM
link   
We hire people who have an elaborate foreign language to argue in said language so the they can define the barriers of our civilization and it seems to be based on the individuals ability to debate in that language how wealth is distributed as well.
Right or wrong are obfiscated by those who are superior in how this language has been applied.
Now supposedly it is all based on the Constitution but they are attempting to take THAT down too,which is against established law,without a 50 state vote.



posted on Jun, 24 2013 @ 07:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by cartenz
reply to post by Wifibrains
 


I'll make a deal with you:

I watch the (3) Matrix movies if you read all 192 pages of the Meads judgement:
www.canlii.ca...

For me that is a large undertaking; Deal?

This is about sharing understanding.


I stopped reading when I saw that Dennis Meads was using the postmaster crap and spelling his name in all lower case, with colons and hyphens (cause that makes it magic!).

What has me concerned is that the judge created an nondefinable category to lump together all those who reject the state's authority. That's some bullcrap right there.

My reasons for rejecting the state's authority are MANY. Some of them build on each other, and some are actually maxims-at-law. At the root of said rejection is my acceptance of responsibility for the whole of my experience. None are authorized to make any decisions for me so long as I can comport myself lawfully. I do recognize the need for taxation for the maintenance of the infrastructure that I use on a daily basis. However, these taxes must lawfully be apportioned. Making something legal by fiat does not and can not make it lawful. Conversely, an entity or action that is inherently lawful cannot be made unlawful by human fiat. It can only be made illegal, and legality is the playground of scoundrels and madmen.





new topics
 
2

log in

join