Modern Greek, a demotic language, influenced by scholarly-leterary people, writers etc. most of whom in Greece are communists --yes, they have to do with the evolution of the Greek language!-- is actually a bastard or hybrid language — Alkis Piskas

It is one of the main issues I hate the most about politics and politicians. Why do they destroy everything? what happened to the creation of "modern Greek" is anything but the negative influence of marixist and Leninist "thinkers" that want to re-establish whatever. But this problem is not only on vocabulary/lexicon/grammar/ aspects but other things such as history or economics...

the ancient and purist versions. — Alkis Piskas

It is time to claim the purity of Greek language!
Make Greece great again! :grin:

Well, institutions always exaggerate, don't they? — Alkis Piskas

Yes, you are so right!

What if changes were proposed that were based on a thorough understanding of the language—would you then think the changes were acceptable? — Jamal

Well, in this case the changes would be acceptable. Spanish suffers a lot of changes each year in order to accommodate it in all the specialities among all the Hispanic countries of the world. It is ok and a good effort to keep the language alive. But I still think that a language should be protected from activists who don't have a clue on philology. Grammar and lexicon are complex issues and are not so easy to change.

Of course. As far as I am concerned, it's the first time I heard about it. Is it used for any other language than Spanish? — Alkis Piskas

I think not, the attempt of using a X or E instead of gender using is (at the moment) a Hispanic issue. I wish it doesn't spread to other languages or lexicons...

Once I used just "he" in expressing some thought in a comment in TPF and I got a bad reaction from a female member! — Alkis Piskas

Oh Jesus! That was so painful indeed. Well, sadly, the inconvenience of using he or she in terms of grammar is something that has surpassed institutions that were always been "cultural" and "professionals", for example American Philosophy Association says in its rules about submitting papers: "Guidelines for Non-Sexist Use of Language," which it says is, "A pamphlet outlining ways to modify language in order to eliminate gender-specific references"... this is out of control.

The Greek language does not have any of these problems. It has 3 genders. The neuter gender takes a different ending than the one for male and female names and adjectives. This allows to use that gender to cpver both male and female cases. — Alkis Piskas

We have to protect Greek language at all costs!

Moral of the story: There's always a linguistic solution if one does not want to sound sexist! :smile: — Alkis Piskas

It could be... but I still see Spanish as non sexist language because whenever we use gender endings exclusively for women, then it means that is far away of being sexist.

If they are structures of human speech, why does modern structure is not used by the large number of citizen? as the poll I shared in OP says: 40% of Latinos do find "Latinx" offensive, and 30% would be less likely to vote for a politician who used it [New York Post, December 8, 2021, p.25].

On the other hand, I know that you have been in Spain a lot of times and you would notice that we use gender endings (- "a" for woman, - "o" for men, and a neutral " - e" for some words). It is just the structure of our language and that's how it used and spoken by the 99 % percent of the citizens.
This happens thanks to academics and professionals who help people to speak and write correctly.

Another rare fact: A minister of our government proposed a few years ago to switch "Él" and "Ella" to "Elle" to refer both men and women. It was a failure because nobody knows where "elle" comes from and it looks like a french word.
So, it seems that we will still use gender endings in our speech.

Language is an organic product of our collective minds. — Pantagruel

I disagree.

I don't see language as a metaphysical concept as you seem to see. Lexical and grammatical structures are based on logic and they were established with the aim of "writing well" and put some norms in the vocabulary. This is not about being static or boring - because people like me refuse to accept and adapt such words - but to keep with a basic sense in our languages.
Furthermore, most of the "activists" who are against the gender endings or "oppressive" languages do not use good arguments to change the situation. They just use this debate for political (?) and emotional purposes without taking in consideration the importance of a logical structure such as language.

defilnes "Latino" as (1) "A native or inhabitant of Latin America" and (2) "A person of Latin American origin living in the U.S." What's the problem with it? Gender is not involved at all. — Alkis Piskas

The problem with Spanish words - according to some authors - is the fact that we have "gender" endings. Thus, "- a" or "- o" if we are referring to a woman or a man. This is the only reason of why some people tend to substitute those gender endings with the letter "- e" or just "- x". I also think it is stupid and lacks of logical value, even disrespects the integrity of Spanish language...

Oh, yes... I forgot about one the main problems: mass media and modern journalism. As you pointed out, they didn't a good job in the past decades because they are responsible of the prejudice of labelling people. Big companies of journalism (for example, CNN or The New York Times) use tactis to make up reality as they want. Isn't it infamous how they treat the rights of citizens just to get exclusives? their information is biased and shows a poor general image of the world.

On the other hand, my country promoted a law which forbids to journalists to "highlight" the nationality, gender or sexual group, with the aim to protect the privacy of the persons when they got involved in trouble, like in a crime. Well, paradoxically, this law didn't get the objective and the different groups of people felt more offended than ever

But, if we think about it, not only in mass media but everywhere (in TV context) appears groups that were omitted once. I am not upset for such action but the motives. They just use them because it would attract people and is "cool" to live in different/modern times. Those groups are pompously represented more than ever.

Perfect, take your time friend! :up:

More on Latinx: — BC

Yes, I already checked that research which is just another proof that "latinx" is both non-sense and non-existent.
On the other hand, it is interesting to highlight that in Spain, we don't use the words of "latina" or "latino", we call them suramericanos (south Americans). Whenever I saw latino word I always thought on music references but it seems that affects some people in this world...

BTW, Old English was as gendered as modern German. Most of the gendered forms were discarded starting around 1100 years ago, as Old English evolved into Middle English and as Middle English evolved into Modern English, about 600 years ago--give or take 15 minutes. — BC

Exactly. Language is science and the lexicon is based on logical grammatical structures. I think seeing gender offends in these norms is nit-picking.

Ola! Can you give me the reference about your OP and the rest so that I can know what you two are talking about? — Alkis Piskas

Here is the reference: Against the Theory of "Sexist Language"

I started this OP with the aim to make constructive arguments against all of those who want to destroy language and lexicon just for "gender" or feminists issues. According to some "authors" it seems that some languages as Spanish or English were constructed against women and a vigorous image of Men. I am disagree with all of this non-sense and I tried to make arguments using both Spanish and English lexicon. Nonetheless, I am also interested in Greek. I guess your language was constructed by grammar logic and reasoning standards, and not with the aim of "disrespecting" women or offence genders.

This miraculous birth was celebrated by 'constructivists' who think gender and sex is a social invention. This nonsense would be bad enough if 'child-bearing men' only appeared in marginal academic discussions, but no -- "pregnant person" is a usage of National Public Radio and the New York Times (maybe not the New York Post.) — BC

:up: :100:

:up: Thanks BC for sharing a good technical argument.

The technical term for this theory is "bullshit". Let's get technical about 's. — BC

I understand that you would have felt upset, but yes the quotes I shared in my OP are real and they are defended by some "specialists" in this matter...

The paper I had read yesterday, also wonders: How can "-'s" be a contraction of "his" when "-es" or "-s" are genitive endings in Old English, German, Greek, etc, without being contractions of anything, let alone a particular historical pronoun?
Or when "s" is the genitive ending in the feminine first declension of Greek but not the masculine second declension, and for both in the third declension , meaning that it historically has had no fixed gender association?

Interesting and good arguments to all of those who wants to destroy a language and its lexicon!

I guess @Alkis Piskas can help us to make deep arguments towards this debate using and understanding an old language/lexicon as Greek.

First of all, thank you for taking part in this thread.

I am aware that using Latinx argument cannot be so taken into account in Anglo-Saxon countries because there are not gender endings such as "latina" and "latino". Nonetheless, my intention was to criticise the absurdity of statements provided by feminists who are called themselves as "philosphers" or some politicians who wants to make this as their propaganda. It pisses me off because they denigrate a language, which is one of the most appreciated cultural heritage of a society. I wanted to make such arguments because of I am angry reading those words such as "latinx" or "niñe" instead of "niña" or "niño", etc... But I guess my uncontrolled emotions didn't make solid arguments.

In the preface, the author indicated he had alternated using "she," and "he;" and "him" and "her" in different sections of the text — T Clark

I don't see a problem here and yes, it is a good example. At least the author explained in the preface why he opted to use that grammatical performance instead of promoting hate speech against a language.

Right, judge for yourself. Am I an honest voter, or a troll? — Metaphysician Undercover

You are a metaphysician honest troll.

Oh yes! I didn't see his post:

There. Happy now? — Metaphysician Undercover

So, we can interpret that the vote comes from him. :eyes:

And at 24 votes, one would have expected one or two folk to have chosen idealism. None did, despite their rejection of realism. — Banno

Now the survey has 25 votes and appears a vote to idealism. I don't know if it is just coincidence or the fact that an user is trolling us... :chin:

Congratulations for your publication! :up:

I'm not sure why idealism is on there. Idealism is not a position on whether or not there is an external world, but about whether that world (external or not) is independent of any minds. — bert1

It is there as an option and I think is important to consider of, nonetheless as I pointed out yesterday, the option of "idealism" receives zero votes. It is true that some users thought on such option but they weren't that sure to choose it and then, they opted for another neutral position.
We have to highlight how the theories and thinkers have changed. Back in the day, Platonism (thus, idealism) was one of the main basic roots and now most of the people go for skepticism or non-skeptical realism.

Funny thing is: it doesn't make sense to call a world "external" unless you think there's an "internal" somewhere — frank

:100: :up:

well you can not study your self without taking in to account your environment. We are the product of the external world. — Nickolasgaspar

I see it reverse. The external world is a product of our consciousness and how we interpret it. If it is "real" or not depends on the theories, and that's why some are Platonist, agnostic, skepticism, etc... all of those help us to understand if everything around us real, but we start with the basic affirmative premise of Cogito ergo sum: "I think, therefore I am", not taking in account if the environment is real or not.

A claim is wise when it is based on knowledge — Nickolasgaspar

And knowledge is based on what?

The central issue οf Philosophy is the construction of wise theoretical frameworks capable to expand our understanding on all aspects of the world — Nickolasgaspar

What about the existence of ourselves rather than finding knowledge on external world? Cartesian thought can be important to develop such theories frameworks. I don’t think that external world is necessarily the main point or cause of every philosophical theory...

and the only available way we have to evaluate our conclusions as wise or not. — Nickolasgaspar

And how we "evaluate" conclusions?

I am agree with you that those concepts are muddled. One option is "agnostic/undecided", when, in my humble opinion, these two are different concepts and the first tend to be connected with religion rather than the big debate on realism.

As I expected, most of the votes went to "non-skeptical realism" because after reading and taking part in some threads, most of the members founded their arguments based on such theory.
Nonetheless, a few years ago I started a thread on "Gödel's philosophy of mathematics" and it truned out in a platonic idealism conversation.

I appreciate that at least, you deeply considered the option of "idealism" but it is true that is complex to answer.

External World: I accept or lean towards: — Banno

It is interesting that none goes for idealism yet. I remember debating in some threads with members who were Platonist.

Assume that karma and reincarnation are valid: — jasonm

The "karmic" solution is that this person has to live their next life being persecuted. — jasonm

If I am not wrong about karma and reincarnation, I guess in your "new body" and "new mind" after you born again, you are not able to remind of or having memories of your past life and the cause of your death for being a Jew in Nazi Germany.
On the other hand, reincarnation doesn't necessarily ends up in a human form. You can reincarnate in a plant or animal, for example.

So, I don't see a paradox at all.

Paradoxically, life is only meaningful when death is approaching to us.

"Life" might be nothing more than an ongoing, self-esteeming story certain ephemeral, coprophagic arrangements of matter are telling themselves — 180 Proof

:up: :sparkle:

Your arguments are so interesting. I have always understood the theory of "survival of the fittest" on a military/conquering way. Some authors, for example, defended the power of Roman Empire among Europe because how they showed to be the "fittest". So, I guess it can be understood as a principle to just defend a cause in wars. Could be a theory which romantize warlike purposes?
As Alkis Piskas, pointed out, it could lead us in a chaotic context like the Genocide inside Nazi Germany.
Then, I must answer the following question:

1) Is this concept or principle a "realistic" one, i.e. does it correspond and fit our common reality about life? — Alkis Piskas

If it is real o no depends on the context. Probably inside a biological system or environment is useless but to promote destruction and chaos such theory does exist.

I guess my frustration would come from the same source as it does for many, a constant curiosity/desire to know something better. To understand deeper. To demonstrate a higher level of knowledge and wisdom. And then recognising that I'm just as confused and unsure, as limited in resources and tools to discover as the next person. — Benj96

You are right in the fact that is difficult to get satisfied in terms of culture. Art and philosophy are the deepest topics in human understanding. I am even aware that I will die without knowing or understanding everything. It is impossible to reach such level of wisdom because our lives are limited and we dont have enough time to discover it all. Nonetheless, at least, in our limted space and time we have to do our best to reach wisdom and avoid ignorance.
I guess that's should be one of the main purposes of each person. Does wisdom help to reach happinness? I think yes

Frustratingly, I don't believe science alone will ever discovery an universal principle that explains all of reality as science is but one discipline and one dogma in the sphere of human means to understand the universe — Benj96

I understand your point, but why do you get frustrated? Don’t you think is better to always have debates and questions? The nature of universe looks endless and it is one of the most beautiful and sublime acts inside philosophy.

Are there more plausible dogmas for a "God" than those posited by major religions?

Interesting but difficult question to answer of. I think the only way to find out more plausible dogmas, we have to go back to archaic times. Ancient Egypt could be a good example because such civilization was polytheistic and they compared their “gods” or “deities” with nature or universe, for example: The Egyptian sun god Rê appears in various forms. Rê is a god in human form, with a blue skin, who sails across the sky in a boat. Myth allows for a multiplicity of explanations, where the explanations are not logically exclusive (can contradict each other) and are often humorous.
Another interesting example: The Egyptian king Akhenaton who introduced a monotheistic cult of one God, the sun god Aton and abolished the worship of all the other traditional Egyptian gods.

I see that with the pass of centuries, most of the empires decided to turn in monotheistic societies. Nonetheless, it is good to consider how Akhenaton consider the sun as the cult of one god rather than humanized characters. I guess Egyptian culture is the closer to always had more plausible god to understand universe and nature.

But all of the above is just my humble opinion.

The alarm went off in the kitchen and the intruder was in the bedroom! It's amazing, nature! — Agent Smith

The alarm just accomplished its task: warning you for approaching dangers. :smile: It doesn't matter the place where it went off.

I've generally never seen it much different than this, it's just that each generation's trivialities seem more grotesque that the last. — Tom Storm

We can argue that is our fault and probably one of the most sensible decisions could be not go to vote at all...

:sparkle: February 17th.

So, we're electing leaders based on sex/gender now? — Agent Smith

Seemingly, the masses go to vote just for trivial aspects rather than asking to the politicians more effectiveness. We live in a period of time where it is more important for a politician to have a good spotlight than a great rethoric.

I think it depends on the country and even the context we are deating about. The paper that I had read was related to the big increase in both GDP and rents in Estonia. Some economists made a critical argument in this country because of the laxi of taxation. Nonetheless, the prime minister answered to this in the following way as it appears quoted in the paper I mentioned:

Let's write about something we know nothing about & be smug, overbearing & patronizing: after all, they're just wogs... Guess a Nobel [i.e. Paul Krugman's] in trade means you can pontificate on fiscal matters & declare my country a "wasteland." Must be a Princeton vs Columbia thing.

- Toomas Hendrik Ilves, President of Estonia, a graduate of Columbia University, in response to a blog post by the Keynesian Paul Krugman about the"incomplete recovery" of Estonia from the European recession, June 6, 2012.

Yet, the paper is ten years old and now Estonia suffered a decreasing in both GDP and tax recollection.

“Estonia’s economy rebounded strongly last year, after weathering the pandemic better than peer countries. Now, the economic impact of Russia’s war against Ukraine is hurting growth, fanning inflation and heightening poverty challenges. This makes structural reforms to reduce labour shortages, protecting labour market flexibility and addressing skills mismatches even more important and more pressing,”

- OECD Secretary-General Mathias Cormann.

Maybe when it says "protecting labour flexibility" some economists defend a reduction of tax income. At least, it helped them some years ago...

Dynamics and immobilist politics in Japan by J.A.A. Stockwin, Alan Rix, Aurelia George, James Horne, Daiichi Itō and Martin Collick.

It is my first time reading a scientific book on political and economics of Japan. For the past two years I only had read literature (what I enjoy a lot) but I am also interested in other perspectives towards this country. It is a 326 pages long and after reading the introduction looks like so interesting.

I guess the mangakas wrote all the plot depending in the role of Kira. Believe or not, most of the fans have rooted for Kira instead of L...

And Portugal, which can be labelled Hispanic since it was also a part of the Roman province of Hispania. — Xanatos

Well, truste me when I say that they hate to be compared with Spaniards :lol:

Frankly, I like L's cleverness and seductive voice most of all. — Xanatos

Same. I remember getting disappointed when Kira killed him. I never liked the personality of Kira... such arrogant. L is more related to my personality, introvert and silent.

Quite interesting that the most violent countries are primarily black and Hispanic. — Xanatos

It is sad... I guess one of the main causes is that they live in poor and undeveloped countries. Then, they need to use violence to survive or get basic resources.
Among Hispanic countries only Spain and Chile are states where they care about people.