I have heard it said that Plato is so accesible because there was no philosophical language in place when he wrote. He had no other choice but to NOT use "big words".

His student Aristotle certainly used a lot, though -- I mean eudaimonea?

Some people, believe it or not talk past many other with large and elaborate vocabularies. Like said in previous posts, philosophers tend to string big words together. This, while not necessarily the best way of getting a point across, is an opportunity for you to learn what some of these words mean.

I for one, do not like to use big words because the point can still be made in simple terms. There's nothing wrong with being simple nor is there anything wrong with using big words.

People who tend to use big words that are out of the ordinary, talk past each other and rarely get the message across that they intended. There are people in this world who can talk with big words and understand them, but they are usually not so good and presenting a message clearly for the ordinary reader.

Each of us have a unique way of expressing our thoughts and sometime emotions. Nothing wrong with that either way.


There's no reason for comments like that towards another member. h-really: ... is there?

This comment grew out of seeing about five quick posts that were pointless. One about this being a ghetto community, another about video games being better than books, and yet another about reading being a waste of time. This thread just seemed like a continuation of low-brow "humor".

No worries. Will take a look and please don't hesitate to report a post if you see it. It's very difficult to read every post as this forum continues to grow so we depend much on the community to report posts that don't belong.

To the right side and on top of every post is a icon and clicking that will present you with a text box where you explain the reason you reported the post. This post is immediately copied into the admin and moderators forums and email notifications are sent out.

If they don't belong, they will be removed, edited or deleted altogether. Be on the look out for my video tutorial this weekend on some of the features you may not know even exist and thank you for responding... On with the Big Words discussion!

LOL, on the other hand the big meanings mostly were written down by him first.

Unfortunately my dearest companion, I concieve it indubadably impossible, and incoherently impassable, when writing inhumanly macroscopic* forms of communication; to significantly reduce, thereby decreasing, the gastronomic properties of my exponentially increasing word size.

*(macro is opposite of micro)

Big words does not elucidates that it is bombastic,for we use them in written and orally virtually every minute,they are indispensable.Furthermore,we read books,et cetera,and shouldn't we learn unprecedented words?Have faith in me,with willingness everyone can be a professional of words,and you will be satiated.

There are times when philosophical thinking needs to use words in a very precise sense, or to describe occasions that are not commonplace, or to establish through definition an unique vocabulary that will allow it to communicate fully the results of its meditation.

In a way, the philosopher shares with the poet a world-making (poesis in Greek is a "making" or a "creating"), and though the objects intended may differ, the medium of language does not. Both often seek to expand the literal or usual meanings of words, both often search for verbal metaphors in their accounts.
To ask of a Shakespeare to use simple words would be to deny him the use of "the multitudinous seas incarnadine" and replace it with pinkish waters; something unique and important is lost. So,too, it is with philosophy.

Yes, I'm afraid I do. Perhaps this is why I have achieved a near-mythical pariah status among my small circle of simian acquaintances.

You had me until your extraneous and wholly superfluous explanatory parenthetical.

I'm unsure that relatively illiterate people sharing a 'philosophy forum' with many educated people have much right to whine about "big words".
Get a good vocabulary book and educate yourself, rather than complaining about the education/literacy of others.

That is wholly right,when in doubt it is recommended to check for them rather than citing that is cumbersome.

In philosophy we struggle to communicate. The meaning inside our heads is mashed, categorized, translated into words, shot across the communication-medium, received on the other end, translated into thoughts, colored and corrupted by the perciever's mind, then finally formed into the "message received". With so many ways - within the communicative process - for the message to get lost or corrupted, using *concrete* verbiage is one of the few ways we can help reduce misunderstanding.

That being said...

I think that for most folk, words chosen tend to be the easiest and shortest. Further, most people don't read much and shy away from concepts unknown. If they have a dictionary, it's either propping up the couch or exists solely as an unused internet-link. We're lazy - we're bang-for-buck creatures. So substandard - smoothed over - language becomes the norm and perspicuity falters.


:Glasses:

I think people who speak using big words make things sound more complicated and complex then what they really are
But for those who can understand it, it narrows down the information being said.
Philosophy is one of the ways to use complicated sentences to explain simple concepts. lol

In life,devoid of words you would be left out in the apace development.Everyone inevitably learns words for work and examinations,some words elucidate your purport in saying or writing,then people would not generally taunt you.

If you perceive they are too perplex,then don't complain or negate,you live in the way you yearn to be.No one is compelling you to learn big words,do not harbor hallucination.

Learning needs time,and the triumph will occur in the future.

Hey Regina,

This caught my eye; actually, it caught my eye before but I decided to let it go, but reading it again I'd like to comment. I think you've hit on something that ought be fleshed out:

This sentiment...

... is some times true. There are people who over-complicate and over-intellectualize the simple. But in my experience this is rather rare; often times what we perceive to be a psuedo-intellectual is simply someone working to, very specifically, clarify a concept that looks simple, but isn't. When we make this mistake by judging, we impugn someone's motives - almost arrogantly deciding for ourselves - that, "... this guy just wants to sound intelligent" or "... keep it simple stupid". Again, while I agree that this is sometimes the case, assuming we know someone's motives ends up with us 'missing the boat'.

Over-generalizing is one of the biggest pitfalls to any discussion (philosophy or other).

I just wanted to add a caution - be it needed or not.

Thanks

*Socrates is portrayed in the dialogues with his fellow Athenians as beginning with common conceptions of important words and challenging these whilst showing that the word/concept was not as simple as everyone thought.
*The Philosopher writes that "Philosophy begins with wonder," and wonder can be translated as "confusion" or "puzzlement." One goes through life not really paying attention until something unusual intrudes itself, seems striking because it "does not fit."
*Kant is "awakened from his dogmatic slumber" by reading Hume, and begins to see question marks about received opinions about knowledge.

It is difficult for the philosopher in his questioning to remain within the accepted or simple vocabulary that describes (and re-inforces) the object of his interrogation as he begins to make distinctions, to make refinements in his thinking about it.

The result of this exploration is a greatly refined map that shows new details: the great rivers are there, but so are the meandering streams and creeks; the paved highways are there, but so are the local roads and even the paths through the fields. If we wish to follow these results so carefully, the original map must be discarded and we must ask for a copy of the new one.

I'm reminded of a time when I was listening to the radio and the announcer was trying to pronounce the name of the band Live's album, Secret Samadhi.....

"Next up we've got a track from Secret Sam... sami... smama... smamdi... uh, well, whatever. I think that's one of those words you're not supposed to know how to pronounce."

Word you're not supposed to know how to pronounce. It's a fascinating concept.

My first adventure into philosophy forum land was about 8 months ago. My vocabulary has increased but still I am not sure were those words are appropriate and often come up and bite me in the rear. Ha. At first I thought is was more or less a "right of passage" for those who are participating in these forums that served as an "off limits" sign to those who were not academically equipped to understand what was being said. Now to some degree I believe that is true and can often be identified by the ego of certain individuals who perpetually use them as if it were a badge of honor. In a way you can't disparage that for it is a badge of honor and serves as a reward for what they had to go through to adequately understand what those words mean. If I had devoted my life to academia (not saying all do) I too would be inclined to "spout off" every now and then. It's human nature.

I would like to say those of you on this forum are by far more civil and considerate that another I had the "displeasure" of participating in. I know there are times when like minds are communicating and vocabulary is of no consequence, but it would be nice to know what in the hell they were talking about. Ha.:perplexed: You never know when something profound out of the mouths of babe's might just emerge.

So would it be too much to ask, if such a discourse could transpire using much simpler vocabulary without any lessening of communication be kept in mind when possible. When not, don't worry about it. Me for one, would greatly appreciate it. Now I know sometimes even short words can blow your mind such as Descarte's "I think, therefore I am". Yeah, OK. :brickwall:

Thanks,
William