Ever find a YouTube video that just states everything you think on a subject?

The more you talk about this, the mroe this sounds like it should be the various subsets of the broadest definition of game, not categories in themselves

 

Comparing it to Newspeak goes beyond hyperbolic and goes straight into bullshit territory. Newspeak only works because there's a large overbearing entity in the background suppressing thought and purging the people who dare think those thoughts so that they don't contaminate the whole with their ideas. The evolution of language works nothing like that and is far too chaotic to ever be like that as well.

People consciously invent new words or adopt foreign ones all the time. Ideas and concepts don't stop existing because there aren't words to describe them. English, for example, doesn't have a direct translation for the word saudade, which is a Portuguese word used to describe a melancholic longing for somebody who's far away from you. While there isn't an exact word for it in English, people who don't know of that word are still able to feel that emotion and, even more importantly, are able to describe it. Words simply encapsulate ideas. That doesn't mean they are the idea. If the word disappears, the idea can continue to exist.

 

Wait, newspeak is a thing? I thought it was just a word he was using to refer to how people talk nowadays. What's newspeak?

 

I disagree. Game is still used, and still has use, as a word for something that game theory can be applied to for an optimal outcome. I've gotten into many arguments about this in the tabletop community because I hate Gamism in my tabletop RPGs.

As defined under GNS Theory:

Yes, these definitions are used by people consistently. Yes, I have gotten into heated arguments about them before.

I always argue that gamists are troublesome because they try to make optimal decisions in spite of what makes a good story. This has gotten me in a lot of trouble.

As you can see from this and other definitions, there is something to be said if the true nature of gaming and what that encompasses. For those who believe that gaming can have a true nature, this is it. Anything else is just flavor on top of a true game which applies under this definition.

I enjoy both in certain contexts. I prefer for the game part of tabletop Role Playing Games to be flavor added to the story. When it comes to video games, it depends. I enjoy both games that focus on the gamism and games that focus on the narrativism.

I have a huge problem with saying that they are both 'games'. I have that problem because game can already has a clear cut and practical use for a subset of the category.

If you want to make them different subsets of something, don't borrow the name of the whole from one of the subsets. As I have said time and time again, that will only confuse things and make people forget about the difference completely.[DOUBLEPOST=1402204070][/DOUBLEPOST]

It works like that sometimes.

Don't tell me it doesn't when I have to explain to people who have gone to universities for language or, god forbid, political science what I mean when I say I am an anarchist.

 

Maki-rin, you know most people call those munchkins.

 

1984, bro. Newspeak is a fictional language in the book that's used to suppress freedom of thought by limiting people's vocabulary. For example, there's no word for bad, just ungood.

Even then it doesn't really matter because the idea of what you believe an "anarchist" to mean still continues to exist even if the meaning of the word has changed due to various factors. Words change. Think of them as variables. They can contain different values and those values can change but the value isn't bound to that variable and can be transferred to another variable or stand on its own. Maybe instead of using a word that has a very negative connotation and a completely different meaning than it used to, use a different word like voluntaryist which is neutral and gets the general concept across or just describe your views instead of using a word that already has a meaning attributed to it. Work with what you've got because trying to force people to change their vocabulary rarely works out well.

 

Oh well that already makes it infinitely more ridiculous, human language evolution would never get rid of words for bad things, we'd just make more

 

1984 is dystopian and Newspeak was manufactured.

 

but in this context Makaze is saying it would be self inflicted because of how language is evolving naturally

 

I was just informing you since you clearly never read the book.

 

Yeah, it rings a bell now though, aren't they butchering it into a movie soon or something?

 

It only exists in a select few people. Are you going to say that the word still exists if one person uses it?

Voluntaryism differs from anarchism. Voluntaryism refers specifically to free market capitalism. Anarchists oppose anything that could resemble a monopoly. Example: Voluntaryists tend to believe that the poor are there voluntarily. Anarchists tend to believe that social status is a combined result of personal effort and ostracism. In other words, anarchists lean left while voluntaryists lean right.

I am angry about the appropriation. I do not see a reason tochange the name to save myself from an image they ruined like people do with various buzz words.

 

I don't care, I'm listening to ABBA.

 

Well... yes. Especially if there was a dictionary that said so. Eventually when you die nobody will remember you, but that doesn't mean you didn't exist, anyways

 

Then that definition of existence does not apply to what I want.

I want the public, the laymen, to know what anarchism actually is, as a majority, at least as clearly as they understand what democracy is.

 

Then you should try to get as many people as possible to start googling words before they use them. I've started trying to make this a habit. When a remember, I always double check a word if I have any doubt about it. If everybody just used their easily accessible internet things everyone would know a lot more about words and stuff

 

My definition is too complex to fit in the dictionary. It is not even known to most English majors. If you search 'definition of anarchy' you get 'chaos'.

It's been filtered out by both government and laymen for over a century.

Which makes it relevant to this:

“...When compared with the suppression of anarchy every other question sinks into insignificance. The anarchist is the enemy of humanity, the enemy of all mankind, and his is a deeper degree of criminality than any other. No immigrant is allowed to come to our shores if he is an anarchist; and no paper published here or abroad should be permitted circulation in this country if it propagates anarchist opinions.”

— Theodore Roosevelt, April 9, 1908 Address to Congress​

 

You're conflating words with ideas. The word at the end of the day doesn't really matter. It's the idea and meaning associated with it and there's no way to truly eradicate that. Ideas with no words to encapsulate them don't stop existing. While the word "anarchy" has a new meaning and you may not like it, that doesn't mean that the old meaning just stopped being a thing because as you show, it's still an idea in a lot of people's heads and you can express it using other words or create a new word for the concept. It's done all the fucking time.

 

I dunno, I figured anarchy evolved to be chaos because that's ultimately what anarchy begat.
Since anarchy, as a concept, sounds good (kinda like Communism) but ultimately fails due to people either migrating towards authority or just being dicks. Historically, people LOVE higher beings, whether they're kings, presidents, gods. It helps relieve some of the burden of responsibility. The other side of this is that people would to do bad things without a moral code and punishment to go with it. A lack of authority leads to things like vigilantism, manipulation, theft, and other not particularly enjoyable things. In theory there is probably a way to make it work, but it would ironically probably require some sort of supremely powerful force to keep people in check until they eventually learnt not to kill each other, elect leaders, and otherwise do what humans do.

 

You are part of the problem.

Do your googling. When you have the correct definition, click the 'Fallacious' link in my sig for more info.