Don't forget "discriminating."
Although sometimes some people use words to label another's views negatively, or at least in the sense of "I disagree", that is not the only (or main) way those same words are used outside the political arena, or at least inside academic or serious discussion groups. If one goes too far down the philosopher's game of trying to define every word and every nuance of every word and every possible interpretation of every possible word or if one goes too far down the pop-psyche game of seeing the psychological bias or motive behind each word, substantive communication becomes nearly impossible, or so tedious that many will be excluded from it.
I think we can agree that "being judgmental" is generally used in a negative way -- you are being improperly or inappropriately or unfairly judgmental -- as is the term "discriminating," -- despite their more narrow, possibly acceptable uses which do not carry the negative connotation.
Where we appear to disagree in part is the umph we put upon such words as "proselytizing". I find it accurate and descriptive though I don't like it to be done to me univited -- so in that sense I do consider it a negative thing to do -- but disguising proselytizing with words like "sharing the good news" does not change the nature of the act one bit. And I dislike it just as much. Even when it is someone with whom I substantively agree.
Steve
On Wednesday, June 2, 2004, at 10:34 PM, Francis Beckwith wrote:
On 6/2/04 9:08 PM, "Steven Jamar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Speak for yourself. That is not how I use the words or how many people
I regularly discuss things with use them. Your assumption that that is
how they are being used creates problems.
That would make me sectarian. :-) All kidding aside, what I was trying to
say--in a somewhat humorous way--is that sometimes we use words (and I
include myself here) in ways that disguise disputed beliefs so that we don't
have to defend them. So, my guy "shares the good news," the other guy
"proselytizes"; my faith is a "relationship" whereas the other guy's is a
"religion"; I believe in "principles" while the other fellow embraces
"dogmas." The one I particularly like is the guy who condemns "being
judgmental," which of course, requires a judgment.
Frank
-- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/
"Love the pitcher less and the water more."
Sufi Saying
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
