Pakistani Teenager dies preventing suicide bomber from attacking his school

[Autumnlicious]

No, it is my linguistic bias showing. Using terms in a confusing manner debases the language and muddies concepts.

That is a position of language prescriptivism. While I sympathise (partially), language changes constantly as a function of time, location and culture.

There is no 'one True English language', so you lack a standard to hold to.

Ergo your statements about muddying meaning are baseless.

You are making an argument from authority - shame on you.

Incorrect. An argument form authority goes as 'X says Y, therefore Y is true because X said it'

I criticized you on arguing from a position of ignorance and passing judgment on a profession you apparently have no experience with.

It is exactly the same kind of tactic that the anti-evolution zealots use, which is why I am calling you out on it.

How can you criticize something you know nothing about?

And it is certainly not all anthropologists who use the term that way.

"And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?"

This is meant to express the incredulity at your statement. Do all climate scientist use the term climate change or do they use the term global warming?

Does the semantic difference make any judgment on the validity of climate change itself?

You and I both know that doesn't make a difference.

You're simply trying to be anti-intellectual instead of bringing up actual evidence of anthropologist arguing against or for the use of race on a cultural basis.

That's pretty low Chas.

[Chas]

No, it is my linguistic bias showing. Using terms in a confusing manner debases the language and muddies concepts.

That is a position of language prescriptivism. While I sympathise (partially), language changes constantly as a function of time, location and culture.

There is no 'one True English language', so you lack a standard to hold to.

Ergo your statements about muddying meaning are baseless.

We have a word with a defined and obvious meaning being used in a confusing fashion. That is muddying.
I never claimed there was 'one True English language', so stick that one in your ear.

You are making an argument from authority - shame on you.

Incorrect. An argument form authority goes as 'X says Y, therefore Y is true because X said it'

I criticized you on arguing from a position of ignorance and passing judgment on a profession you apparently have no experience with.

It is exactly the same kind of tactic that the anti-evolution zealots use, which is why I am calling you out on it.

Yes, you are making an argument from authority by saying that usage is correct because some anthropologists say it is. And I am calling you on it.

And I do have an educated person's familiarity with anthropology, so stick that one in your ear, too.

How can you criticize something you know nothing about?

And it is certainly not all anthropologists who use the term that way.

"And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?"

This is meant to express the incredulity at your statement. Do all climate scientist use the term climate change or do they use the term global warming?

Does the semantic difference make any judgment on the validity of climate change itself?

You and I both know that doesn't make a difference.

You're simply trying to be anti-intellectual instead of bringing up actual evidence of anthropologist arguing against or for the use of race on a cultural basis.

That's pretty low Chas.

I am not arguing that there isn't something like racism in a negative feeling toward all of a religion's adherents - and it absurd of you to interpret it that way - simply that using the term racism is a poor choice of words.

We already have terms that cover this, e.g. intolerance, bigotry, sectarianism. There is no need to muddy the waters.

If one wants to say that religious intolerance is like racism, fine - it's a simile.

Furthermore, you are attempting to shift the burden of proof to me when it was you who claimed that anthropologists use the word that way, but now you tell me to provide evidence that they don't?

That's pretty low, Moros.