It is not the word that is obsolete, it is the philosophy that it describes.
They share the same meaning as far as I can see, material is physical is material, (even 'immaterial' thoughts and dreams are part of existence/'physicality'/'materiality'/context), and until someone can provide a reasonable and rational distinction, I'll continue to use the commonly accepted term.
Is the 'redefinition' an attempt to maintain a failed philosophy by changing the refuted name? A common tactic of 'believers'!
Calling a rock a steak still leaves you hungry.

Last word was yours. What I have said stands, and stands valid, whether you agree or not.
You can call me 'wrong' as often as you like, but your opinion is no more than that, just your opinion, youPerspective.
I've offered a different Perspective. That doesn't make 'yours' wrong, just different (to me, Now!)
Thank you for the conversation.
Peace

lol - I was just going to post this and leave it be for you other guys to duke it out, but I just couldn't help myself. I have been off of the site a little more, because I've been busy with personal things. You still want to debate about moral relativism vs. moral universalism?

I pretty much am up for debating anything. It is fun and helps you learn a lot. Maybe we could in a day or so if that works for you.

Alright, maybe I'll contact you by personal message. I'll let you know in a day or so.