NOTE: A reader on my other blog, The Road to Concord, asked me why I always cite the definitions of the words I use in my posts. I explained to him that, as a matter of sound reasoning, we should always do this: it serves to make sure everyone following the discussion has a better chance of sharing the same understanding of what is meant by the terms used. But I also told the reader that – sadly – I have found it is necessary for nothing more than the simple fact that too few Americans actually know what the words they use actually mean. This got me to thinking that I shouldn’t define fewer words, but more. In fact, I have decided to dedicate an entire series of posts to this subject as it relates to the issues of our day. This is the first in this new series.
Under the “BASIC PRECEPTS” tab in the header of this blog, I wrote a post that explains it is not what we call something that defines it, but the form and function of that object; its nature. This should be self-evident to us, but it isn’t. If I showed you a picture of a cat and said that it suddenly becomes something else when I call it a gato (Spanish for cat), you would not accept my assertion. You know it is still a cat. Likewise, if I show you five pictures of different types of cups, none of them looking anything like the other, and I told you that one was a cup, but the others were actually a hammer, a bat, a ball and a bicycle, you would not accept that, either. Even though they do not look anything alike, you still know that the five pictures are all cups. This is because you instinctively understand that it is the form and function, the nature of a thing that defines it: not the word we use to identify or discuss it. So I wonder why it is so many people cannot see that the ‘entitlements’ they seem to think they ‘deserve’ or have ‘earned’ are actually a modern form of slavery?