| | Rick:
Nathan Hawking wrote:
...the collectivist simply attaches greater value to the whole than to the individual. That's what I said: "In a collective the individual is lost and becomes just a part of the whole."
You also said "'Collective' and 'collection' mean entirely different things."
And that is plainly untrue.
Besides, you're dropping the context, which is politics. The words are not synonyms. "Context-dropping" seems to be a rhetorical favorite.
"Politics" is part of a broader context, namely how the English language is used. You'll note that the M-W definition specified no political context. That's because the word is widely used, not narrowly.
Your attempt to restrict "collective" to political contexts and exclude "collection" is unwarranted, just as was your attempt to reserve "value" for ethical contexts.
Feel free to criticize my choice of words in the future, but don't be surprised if I don't limit myself to the usual O'ist patois.
I might, for example, in a shocking act of intellectual independence, choose the word "kindness" instead of "benevolence."
I go out of my way to avoid liturgical mimicry. Nothing stamps a group as a cult any quicker than conformity in language, and nothing is more ironic than a cult of speak-alike "individualists."
Nathan Hawking
|
|
