[lit-ideas] Re: The de-islamization of Europe
- From: Paul Stone <pas@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 16:19:21 -0500
At 03:59 PM 1/22/2007, you wrote:
If the reader (of posts) doesn't assume these definitions, posts will be
necessarily mis-understood. Are we back to Humpty Dumpty? Or "no master
text" (reader informs the language which informs the reader, etc.)
But the reader's repertoire of definitions [whether right or wrong] is of
no concern of the writer if HE thinks the words are clearly defined and
useable. I think the problem with "militant islamic" isn't with the use of
the use of "islamic", it's with the use of the modifier "militant" and its
location in the phrase, for coupled together, "islamic" soon slides into
"islamist". Perhaps "islamic militant" is more accurate to acceptably
describe Saddam Hussein. And even though Andreas was perhaps right to point
out that Saddam Hussein wasn't an "islamist", he CERTAINLY WAS both,
islamic (he took a Qu'ran to his death) and militant. Saying he was secular
is a matter of degree and open to debate and reminds me of George Carlin's
line, perhaps mocking "life" -- "yes, you will live another 20 years...
unfortunately you'll be bleeding from both eyes."
But again, if certain words are understood to mean certain things, then
there IS going to be misunderstanding and misreadings by those who are not
privy to those certain things that they mean.
typically convoluted,
p
##########
Paul Stone
pas@xxxxxxxx
Kingsville, ON, Canada
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
