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 be uselessly vague, or out of date compared with what people are currently 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