Well Carlin is right that the user and intention and context is most important but we shouldn't ignore connotations completely. Connotations have meanings too. "overweight" has a different connotative meaning to "fat".

I can honesty say to a highly obese friend that they're not fat without lying because "fat" includes a negative connotation which I would be lying about if I said it. They're highly overweight to an unhealthy degree but they're not fat, a fatty or a fatso. If you call someone "fat" it kind of also implies the negative connotation and so means "fat in an insulting way", if I said that to an overweight friend I'd be lying because I don't mean it in an insulting way.

If there's an understanding between friends that it's not meant in a bad way and it's just a joke and they all laugh together then it would no longer be a lie because the connotation would change from the standard "in an insulting way" to a more personal definition of "in a way that's a harmless joke between us as friends."

(November 3, 2016 at 11:31 am)Drich Wrote: I am not speaking about german nor am I speaking about science. I am speaking about the protocol used to incite anger without proper evidence in the case of this thread.

Again the claim was made that X offical is racist because he used a word to describe the shape of a given race of people's eyes.

To which I explained it is context that could only qualify the description of the shape of an eye would be racist

then moved the OP move the goal posts citing lauguage barrier/lost in translation.

Even then I pointed out the word has no meaning with out context then moved to give and example of the worst word one can use in english to describe another race can also be used as a term of endearment Again rendering the op's arguement meaningless without context.

Finally i pulled all of that to gether in a synopsis again pointing to context from which a word is used is the only thing that makes a comment truly racist.

I am not arguing the german here i am pointing out there are no 'evil' words. that you only think that because you have been trained to stop thinking, train not to challenge these key 'evil' words and to default to the same hate you are pretending to stand against.

I'm truly sorry your not... Smart enough to see anything besides mindless trolling, but again that's because you have been trained to turn off your cognitive thinking process when ever someone challenges one of your core/foundational beliefs and make that person the automatic bad guy.

That is the message I have been addressing in these last few threads these pasts weeks.

That you guys go into angry mob mode when ever someone utters an evil word, or does not measure up to your insane level of disdain for said word or principle.

When one is trained to think in key words as you all have been you give up cognitive reasoning for a selfish right to exhibit the anger and intolerance you have otherwise been barred from showing.

Gee, I could have predicted that response nearly word for word. Time for this pony to get a new trick.

(November 3, 2016 at 2:20 pm)Alasdair Ham Wrote: Well Carlin is right that the user and intention and context is most important but we shouldn't ignore connotations completely. Connotations have meanings too. "overweight" has a different connotative meaning to "fat".

I can honesty say to a highly obese friend that they're not fat without lying because "fat" includes a negative connotation which I would be lying about if I said it. They're highly overweight to an unhealthy degree but they're not fat, a fatty or a fatso. If you call someone "fat" it kind of also implies the negative connotation and so means "fat in an insulting way", if I said that to an overweight friend I'd be lying because I don't mean it in an insulting way.

If there's an understanding between friends that it's not meant in a bad way and it's just a joke and they all laugh together then it would no longer be a lie because the connotation would change from the standard "in an insulting way" to a more personal definition of "in a way that's a harmless joke between us as friends."

But do you not see that Connotations is the only element being used in the OP example? Can you not see that everyone on topic agreed with the OP's assessment based soley on the connotations of those words?

Is this not a problem for you? That context is reassigned to automatically fit the mob narrative because a 'key word' was used and assigned to an individual?

(November 4, 2016 at 12:18 pm)Drich Wrote: But do you not see that Connotations is the only element being used in the OP example? Can you not see that everyone on topic agreed with the OP's assessment based soley on the connotations of those words?

Have you watched the video in the link? Have you listened to what he says, how he says it and the context he says it in? Oh wait, you don't speak German, so it's just your ass talking about assessments.