Definitions and Social Justice
A common thought among the social justices bloggers today is that they can change the definition of words to benefit their own argument. This is not how that works. The dictionary definition of words are definitions that the english language has wholly agreed upon to represent an…
Why do people believe the dictionary is the end-all, and most accurate thing there is? The post above claims that the definitions in the dictionary are “wholly agreed upon” but that is not the case. The dictionary was written and has been maintained by white men. This small group does not speak for everyone nor did they get everyone’s approval on anything. It is ethnocentric to think that one culture’s dictionary speaks for the entire world.
The post above says that words can change, adapt, and take on new meanings, yet wants to down play that racism has been defined by social scientists. I for one, would not hold much value the opinion of someone who has never experienced what he or she is talking about.
The dictionary is not by any means perfect, nor is it the end all be all, I agree. However, the definitions used in the dictionary are explanations as to how people who use the english language use specific words to define specific ideas and concepts. The people who write and rewrite and maintain the dictionary realize that we occasionally use the same word in different ways to convey different ideas and characteristics and base the amendments to words’ definitions on common language trends in today’s society. These white men aren’t trying to oppress you by using the language to erase oppression, its just defining the word “racism” specifically as a form of discrimination. This leaves the definition, as generally used in today’s society, as something that can be used against all races, but can also be used to oppress if used by the majority against a minority.
I am not giving them the ‘benefit of the doubt’. I think the dictionary defines the word “racism” purposely to erase the responsibility of white people by saying they themselves could be victims too instead of accurately listing them as an oppressive power.
Are you attempting to belittle the validity of the definition or racism defined by social scientists?