From: Erik Aronesty (erik@zoneedit.com)
Date: Wed Dec 24 2003 - 12:08:27 MST
From what I understand: modern, engineered religions use (1), rather than (2) or (3).
For example: there was an attempt, in Scientology circles, to use the word "grok", as defined by Heinlen in "Stranger in a Strange Land". This is an excellent word, but it really takes reading a novel to understand it. Ultimately, the word has fallen in and out of favor, and never really made it beyond the people who were science-fiction fans to begin with.
-----Original Message-----
From: "David Lucifer" <david@lucifer.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 09:08:02
To:virus@lucifer.com
Subject: Re:virus: Trust versus Faith
[quote from: simul on 2003-12-19 at 10:21:52]
I encourage you to \"try on\" these definitions in your reading and in your life to see if/how they work.
I've been trying out Simul's suggested redefinitions of trust and faith and they do indeed represent a useful distinction, not unlike previous suggestions to redefine knowledge and belief along similar lines. I agree it is very important to distinguish between the rationally and irrationally justified when it comes to assumptions and expectations.
We have a few choices though: 1) we can redefine common words (not so much redefine them as narrowing their previous meaning to a small subset of their previous definition), 2) we can make a habit of always qualifying the terms with an adjective (saying "rational belief" instead of just "belief"), or 3) we can make up new words for the concepts.
We also have to consider the audience in our choice. For example we can assume that with sufficient effort we can redefine old words within this community, but there is no way we can have that same effect on the public at large, at least not unless or until the CoV becomes a major memetic force on the order of Christianity. So we use different terminology for internal and external communications? That would certainly be a hassle.
Another option that being an online organization affords us is the possibility of hyperlinking all "problematic" words to a definition in the CoV lexicon. This will give us most of the advantages of the different options mentioned above, at the cost of an extra effort from the author (which can be minimized through more technology).
Any thoughts on which way is best?
---- This message was posted by David Lucifer to the Virus 2003 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=54;action=display;threadid=29796> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 24 2003 - 12:10:49 MST