Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lanl.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!lanl!crs
From: crs@lanl.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Definitions ("pornography")
Message-ID: <32660@lanl.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 31-Oct-85 12:35:56 EST
Article-I.D.: lanl.32660
Posted: Thu Oct 31 12:35:56 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Nov-85 09:56:28 EST
References: <732@utai.UUCP> <909@utcs.uucp> <504@scirtp.UUCP>
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 35

> >>>It's in the dictionary, look it up.  If porn was not defined, then
> >>>it wouldn't be in the dictionary, in fact, it wouldn't be a word.
> >
> >>From the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:
> >>   pornography	n.  Written, graphic or other forms of communication
> >>		    intended to excite lascivious feelings.
> >
> >In other words, "pornography" is a synonym for _erotica_.
> >

I would sincerely appreciate it if people wouldn't quote my postings
OUT OF CONTEXT.  The following followup to the second level of
quotation says essentially what I said when I posted the dictionary
definition above. 

Aren't we going in circles?  Didn't we expect to be going in circles?

> It is very dangerous (and very common in freshman essays) to base any
> sort of argument on "what it says in the dictionary". Most dictionaries
> are compilations of the meanings which have been attached to words, and
> there is no particular reason to think that future users will continue to
> have the same meanings in mind.  Particularly on sensitive issues, or
> words which are much in the news, a dictionary definition is likely to
> be uselessly vague, or out of date compared with what people are currently
> saying.  And, of course, dictionaries don't all agree on anything more
> complex than words like "chair".  
> 
> ... 
> 
-- 
All opinions are mine alone...

Charlie Sorsby
...!{cmcl2,ihnp4,...}!lanl!crs
crs@lanl.arpa