Prometheus Definition Poll
Finally, democracy is getting somewhere. This November, Wisconsin voters will decide on the definition of a word: “marriage.” In recognition of this landmark step for American democracy, Prometheus Polling Service has readied its first public poll. Instead of defining marriage, we have decided to have you, our readers, define a term that has been declining in popularity even faster than marriage. The term is, of course, “ham radio.” Remember, as you make your choice, that you are living out democracy, and that you are ensuring that your children will remember ham radio as whatever they want to think that it is.
Please choose the answer which best defines “ham radio” for you.
a) the action or the power of describing, explaining, or making definite and clear
b) a radiocommunication service in which radio apparatus are used for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication or technical investigation by individuals who are interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest
c) the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law
d) game played between two teams on a rectangular field having two goalposts at each end and whose object is to get the ball over a goal line or between goalposts by running, passing, or kicking
e) Write-in definition:_____________________
f) A, B, & D
g) None of the above
(Nick Jordan)
6 Comments:
Hilarious, yet very insightful! Regardless of one's stance on the matter, putting definitions to devote is linguistically ridiculous.
This is a poll, not an article. Where's your vote? That goes for anyone else who reads it too.
Begging your pardon!
E) A code name for the Manhattan Project
I don't get this, perhaps I am missing the point of the article, it seems to make a mockery of democracy, what is wrong with publicly defining what marraige is, everyone knows that in order to make laws it is first nessesary to define what is being talked about, even in philosophy, definitions are fundamental, if two people don't agree on what something is they will never be able to have an intelligent conversation about that issue, but I find it hard to believe people don't know what ham radio is. My vote is B.
Mark,
The point is that this question on the ballot undermines language and ultimately the way that society works, and the way that a society can work. If the meaning of language can change based upon 51% of voters in one state (about 23% or less of the adult population, I would have to guess), then we are saying that other supposedly objective truths are actually nothing more than the flavor-of-the month. That makes it awfully difficult to process anything in the world around us, and impossible to interact with other people.
Yes, language does change over time, and yes, it is by popular opinion, but when it changes, it is changed by usage, and not a vote. Philosophy, your example, sets its own definitions if they are out of step with general usage for the very purpose of communicating ideas. If words' meanings can be changed by elections, then they have no meaning at all.
Sorry that's so wordy, but I think it is mostly what I meant.
Thank you very much for the explaination, nick, you rock!
Post a Comment
<< Home