Purpose and tendency concepts – not terms.
© Johansson Inger, Göteborg 26 december 2014 English texi
Concept is a term based on usage of words
What distinguishes a concept of a term is where the concept is based on a given content. This content may be a claim or a reference to past experiences as the basis for the concept while the term.
* The word, chosen by the speaker/writer in reality constitutes a linguistic sub-element of a formulation.
* The “Kit” is chosen due to the speaker’s/writer’s own background. In other words formed by and for those who have language as their mother-language where the word gets its given value in the limited society due to ethnic/cultural and or regional traditions. A chosen word might well have a complete other value in other parts of same country as well as in our World’s regions.
* Community of values can be over time.
Ex: Every closed or relatively distinct society such as in a monastery; in a “close” political group and so on, has their own interpretation and understanding of word’s value. (It’s hard to find words that have same value over time and everywhere)
* Every group/system tries over time to preserve their own values and standards as intact as possible.
Community of values can be lost over time if the linguistic part element is given a different interpretation from the past to the present or in different cultural environments in the present.
Ex. This is the contradictions that exist within the respective Christianity and the Muslim faith.
Both religious groups share what we Christian calls the Old Testament. Thus we all, Christians as well as Muslims share belief of Eden, Exodus as well as that Moses got the Commandments from God. We are all children of Abraham. Same goes for the Jewish people. We might use different words but we all belive in same God.
All arguments have an underlying purpose. The purpose may be clear as water for everyone to understand, but mostly it’s not as easy for others to understand/comprehend.
The purpose can superficially be said to be the reinforcing a group’s position
* Own subjective valuation tend to be used to weaken the opponent/-s. The arguments used are either true, false or partly true but same arguments can be fallacies or valid/sound.
* Based on the common values held by each one’s own cultural, religious or interest group the words used always are chosen from a subjective view due to purpose intended to be put forward.
This is the case in political discussions as well as in fights on ground where political/religious groups/community/countries within today’s border puts forward “information”, “facts”, “valuations” and so on.
* Within a community Safety and tendency use to be valued over truth. What ever truth might be….
What is it that distinguishes community of values from the trend?
A community based on a standard system covered most of those norms in same community/group religious and/or political.
A tendency on the other hand can be a result of same system’s norms, but are nevertheless this is always a subjective evaluation based on the individual who distributes and or is behind the speech or writing.
In specific cases where issues are discussed, the purpose sometimes shines bright and clear no matter all the beautiful words used. Sadly this is not always the case. Words used also aim to weaken opponents’ arguments by usage of disinformation.
Either lightly translucent misinformation. More often a mixture of truth, half truth and outright lies.
IMPORTANT to be remembered: ALL disinformation is undemocratic.
Almost all written, spoken and/or distributed thesis/political argumentation/religious presented belief contains Tendency In many cases the political debate the tendency is partly or completely “hidden” for the listener/ reader. Thus it’s up to the listener/reader himself to be on guard not to “swallow” all statements coming from one side or the other. Same goes for politically, culturally, religiously presented information, facts and/or statements. It’s up to each one of “us” to be aware of this and as good as possible take our own stand. But remember eachone’s own stand has at least part of tendency in it. “We” might be aware of this or not. But it’s there.
Ex. An almost forgotten chosing of words and actual situation shows in the problem:
We have all been through to light a candle.
When the candle has burned for a while, there are two ways to describe this on.
Either the light “burned up” or so the light “burned”.. Same situation but two ways to describe and the word used can be interpreted in completely different view…
Another example is when you are at a party, restaurant or home been served a glass of drink, whatever.
You sit and talk or eat in silence. Lifts the glass periodically. At some point, you have drank half of what’s in the glass.
Is the glass as “half full” or “half empty”?
Our choice of words always is chosen from a subjective view. Same goes for how we as individuals chose to interpret word/words we hear or read. Others, reading or listning, might not have same interpretation of what words stand for. Nor is it certain that those who the words/facts origin from share one or the other’s view for said word…
Pingback: New page in Theories of Science: Purpose and Tendency | Norah4you's Weblog
Pingback: Källkritisk analys, media och politiker – Vad är det? | Norah4you's Weblog