


A definition states the meaning of a word.
The word being defined is the definiendum
and the definition is the definiens.
Numerous types of definitions exist, and
defining a word can mean a variety of things.



Are definitions a help or a hindrance in
understanding our world?
One school of thought maintains that by
defining things we separate then into discrete
parts when in fact the world is continuous, a
seamless cloth.
The idea is that when we define an object we
artificially snip off pieces from the endlessness
of reality in order to make it manageable, but
something of the object’s essence becomes
lost when we try to harness it by forcing it into
the limits of a definition.


However, we do know that to think without
language is extremely difficult, but with a
set of defined words we can conceive and
imagine things almost without limits.
Overall, definitions enrich our
understanding.



Lexical definitions – in this kind of definition a
description is offered of the conventional
meaning of a word, and if the description does
not match the actual way that the word is used,
then the definition is incorrect.
Depending on the accuracy of the survey of the
usage, the definition is either true or false.
A lexical definition gives an explanation of the
general meaning a word carries for a group of
language users.



Stipulative definitions - to introduce unusual or
unfamiliar words, to coin new words, or to
introduce a new meaning to a familiar word.
Stipulative definitions come in two varieties,
arbitrary and precising.
In the arbitrary type people stipulate that, for
their purposes, an invented word will henceforth
carry a particular meaning.
◦ For example, Sigmund Freud invented three terms to
stand for the fundamental energy systems of the
psyche: The “id” represents primal upsurging desires;
the “ego” means control by rationality and realism; and
the “superego” means the internalized social rules,
manifested chiefly in the form of conscience.



In the category of arbitrary stipulative definitions are
also acronyms, or words formed from the initial letters
of a phrase.
We speak, for example, of “NASA,” National Aeronautics
and Space Administration or “NASCAR,” National
Association of Stock Car Auto Racing.
Many words begin as acronyms, and if they become
assimilated into the culture, the original words that
made them up are lost.


The second type of stipulative definition is a
precising one whereby a person proposes to use an
ordinary word in a special, limited, or precise
sense.
For example, a legislator may say, “My bill
proposes aid for the poor, and by ‘poor’ I mean
those with family incomes below $6,000 per year.”

Since all stipulative definitions are forewarnings and
statements of intent, we can never accuse them of being
false; they are, after all, simply proposals. But we can
criticize them for being illegitimate. That is, if someone
offers a definition that we cannot accept psychologically, a
definition that tries to persuade us to accept a peculiar point
of view, then it can be criticized as unacceptable.
◦ For example, “Fork: an instrument used chiefly for putting
dead animals into the mouth.” - Ambrose Bierce
◦ When I talk about the policy giving tax breaks to the middle
class, I define middle class as ________. What does it mean
to be in the middle class?

Sometimes definitions are used for persuasive
purposes and are charged with positive or
negative emotions; in such cases they are
considered loaded. A loaded definition has an
“attitude”; it expresses a value judgment and is
not just a neutral description of conventional
meaning. Take the following examples of
loaded definitions: “an intellectual is someone
who knows everything except how to make
money”; and “immigrant” is “an unenlightened
person who thinks one country is better than
another.” These definitions are funny, but
should be avoided when we are seriously
discussing issues.

Example definitions explain the meaning of a
word by mentioning some instances of it. In
terms of our discussion of extension, they
explain a meaning by pointing out some of the
members of the class. Once we know the range
of things referred to by a term (assuming it is
referential), then we have a clearer
understanding of its meaning. For instance, an
example definition of “bird” might include
Robin, Oriole, Blue jay, and so forth.


Also covered by example definition are
descriptions of the sort of experience that is
involved. For example, we might explain the
meaning of “depressed” as the feeling you get
when you’re alone after breaking up with
someone you’ve been involved with for a long
time. It’s Saturday night, the telephone doesn’t
ring, no one knocks on the door, there’s a party
next door, and a blues song is playing on the
radio. That is being depressed.
We might define “trusting” as disclosing
personal secrets, allowing oneself to be
vulnerable.


Sometimes a description of the experience or a
catalog of examples is not enough of an
explanation, and we can only show the object,
event, or characteristics to which a word
applies. We have an ostensive definition.
For instance, the best way to explain “red” is to
hold up different red objects. To explain “spicy”
we might have them taste a spicy food. Some
things are first hand experiences, and no
description of characteristics will convey the
meaning adequately. A person blind from birth
will never understand the word “red” except in
the descriptive sense.


Synonyms constitute another type of definition,
and here another word is offered that has
approximately the same meaning as the first.
For example, to define honesty we could list
truthfulness, frankness or candor; for humorous
we could list funny, comical, or amusing. Of
course, the synonym must be a word that is
understood, otherwise the meaning of the
original word will not be clarified. Thus the
effectiveness of a synonym definition depends
on the reader’s stock in trade; the larger his or
her vocabulary, the more effective the synonym
is likely to be in explaining the meaning of a
word.


In forming sound definitions, whether stipulative,
lexical, synonym, or example, certain standards
must be met. These standards make the definition
reliable, keep it honest.
Some standards have already been discussed: that
stipulative definitions must be psychologically
acceptable and that lexical definitions must reflect
conventional usage. However, there are additional
criteria for acceptable definitions, and they are
usually listed as pitfalls to avoid.

Definitions should not be circular. A circular
definition usually repeats the defined word in the
definition. To define “cookbook” as “a book used
to cook” is not very informative. A definitions is
also circular when it defines two words in terms of
each other. For example, “A cause is that which
produces an effect” and “An effect is that which
results from a cause.” These definitions are just
going around in circles.


Another trap to avoid is having definitions that
are too broad or too narrow. If our definition is
unduly broad it will cover too much, failing to
rule out things that are extraneous. If it is too
narrow it will cover too little, excluding things
that should be included within the term.
For example, if I think that behaving politely
means not burping at the dinner table then my
notion of what it means to behave politely might
be too narrow. On the other hand, to define
“music” simply as sound would qualify the noise
of jackhammers, sirens, and traffic as different
kinds of music.

Metaphorical definitions should be avoided. In
poetic discourse metaphors and similes, images
and symbols, are the life blood of the art, but in
formulating definitions, where clarity and
directness are critical, such language should be
avoided. It is unilluminating to define a “saint”
as “a dead sinner, revised and edited,” or
“happiness” as “a warm puppy.” To those
familiar with these terms, the coloring adds
interest, but it will not help anyone who is
ignorant of the principle meaning. Such
definitions might even mislead people,
especially those learning English as a second
language.

Sometimes definitions are used for persuasive
purposes and are charged with positive or
negative emotions; in such cases they are
considered loaded. A loaded definition has an
“attitude”; it expresses a value judgment and is
not just a neutral description of conventional
meaning. Take the following examples of
loaded definitions: “an intellectual is someone
who knows everything except how to make
money”; and “immigrant” is “an unenlightened
person who thinks one country is better than
another.” These definitions are funny, but
should be avoided when we are seriously
discussing issues.


Providing good definitions may seem a trivial
matter, but we need to be conscientious about
them because they may be the basis of important
decisions.
For instance, it is crucial to determine the meaning
of “person” in the abortion controversy. If
someone is arrested for sale or possession of
drugs the definitions of “narcotic” and “controlled
substance” are crucial.


Vague words or expressions lack clarity and distinctness,
so that we don’t know whether they apply in a given case.
The limits of their application are fuzzy, and we are
uncertain about what they include and exclude. Almost
all words are vague to some extent, and in most cases
this does not interfere with their meaning. Language is
labeled vague only when it is unnecessarily imprecise,
when the intension does not allow us to identify the
extension. Then we criticize usage and vagueness
becomes a charge.
For example, suppose we ask a used car salesperson how
much a car costs and we are told it’s a bargain, a very
good deal, less expensive than we might think, priced to
move, sure to save us money, and so forth. Because the
car salesperson is not giving us a price, he or she is
probably trying to make us think that that the car is
cheaper than it really is; the vagueness is deliberate and
meant to trick us.



On the other hand, the question “How much do
you love me?” cannot be answered in numbers.
Replies such as “as much as you deserve” or
“not wisely but too well” are perfectly
appropriate.
If we want to measure how happy a person is,
we are demanding what Aristotle called greater
exactitude than the subject matter will allow.
Vagueness is not always negative.
◦ “You must not know too much, or be too precise
or scientific about birds and trees and flowers
and watercraft; a certain free margin, and even
vagueness – perhaps ignorance, credulity – helps
your enjoyment of these things.” – Walt Whitman

In some contexts, of course, it becomes extremely important
to reduce the vagueness of words as much as possible. If
food stamps are offered to the poor, defining who exactly is
“poor” can make a significant difference in people’s lives.


In ambiguity a word contains several meanings, and we
are uncertain which one is meant. We are confused about
the word, phrase, sentence, or passage because it can be
understood in more than one sense.
One traditional distinction that is made among types of
ambiguity is between semantic and syntactic forms.
Semantic ambiguity has to do with the multiple meanings
of a word as it appears in a sentence, either once or twice.
To take a couple of light examples, “Our druggists
dispense with accuracy; “Bikinis now sold for a ridiculous
figure.”

Semantic ambiguity can be more serious, though. The
Second Amendment to the Constitution states, “ a wellregulated militia being necessary to the security of a free
state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall
not be infringed.” Does this mean that only “militia” such
as the National Guard are allowed to have arms, or that
every citizen has the right to own a gun ( and all gun
control laws are unconstitutional)? Serious debate has
occurred as different people interpret the Second
Amendment in different ways.



Syntactic ambiguity applies to a complex
expression when it has more than one meaning
because there is more than one way to understand
its grammatical structure.
We are going to discuss sex on TV.
If you think are waitresses are rude, you should see
our manager.


Under the broad category of semantic ambiguity
the phenomenon of accent should be mentioned.
Here ambiguity occurs because it is unclear which
word in a sentence is being accented or
emphasized.
A defense lawyer once asked a coroner, “How many
autopsies have you performed on dead bodies?”
He replied, “All of my autopsies were on dead
bodies.” The attorney wanted to know the number
of autopsies that had been performed, and the
coroner assumed that he was asking whether all of
his autopsies had been done on corpses. The
misunderstanding occurred because different parts
of the question were stressed.



Read the following definitions and identify
the mistake, whether circular, too broad, too
narrow, metaphorical, or rhetorical/loaded.
Torture is “any act by which severe pain and
suffering, whether physical or mental, is
intentionally inflicted on a person for such
purposes as obtaining from him or a third person
information or a confession. – U.N. Convention
against Torture, 1984
Too narrow. Torture is not always inflicted in order
to obtain information or a confession.



Read the following definitions and identify
the mistake, whether circular, too broad, too
narrow, metaphorical, or rhetorical/loaded.
A lion is a feline.
This definition is too broad because it would
include tigers and panthers and so forth.




Let’s have a friendly contest. How many
commercial messages does the average person
see a day? How many do they see by the time
they are 25 years old?
The typical person sees 250 commercial
messages daily and more than two million of
them by the time he or she is twenty-five years
old.
Studying advertising and the strategies used by
advertisers helps us to become more critical,
insightful, and selective consumers.
When it comes to commercial ads, for the most
part, skepticism is a virtue.


In broad terms, advertising uses promotional
techniques to persuade people to purchase
products or services.
The American Marketing Association’s
definition is “any paid form of nonpersonal
presentation and promotion of ideas, goods,
or services by an identified sponsor.”
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Toasters, lipstick, cologne, etc…
Candidates – some ads try to convince
us to vote for a certain candidate.
Help other people
Give up a bad habit
Join the army
Talk to your kids
Eat at the dinner table
1.
2.
3.
Well trained psychologists.
Creative artists
Spends lots of money to learn our
psychological weaknesses, our
motivations, etc…




College students usually say that
advertising does not influence their
decisions.
However, studies show that ads can
increase sales of certain products.
Most Americans see ads as something
thing they can easily tune in and out.
Advertisers want us to believe that. They
want to subtly influence us.

The majority of things we buy- toothpaste,
toothbrushes, and so forth are pretty much
the same. They share the same marketing
techniques, manufacturing techniques, and
use the same technology. The only
difference may be how it is presented.
Can we trust the news?
Moore and Parker book….
How do news stations get their news? Press
releases from government institutions
and businesses, research is expensive.
Is the media biased? How many people
think so? List reasons why this claim is
true. If you don’t believe this claim is
true, then why do some people think it is
true?

In the mid twentieth century, there were thousands of media
outlets. Since 2001, the Federal Communications Commission
loosened the regulations regarding ownership of newspapers,
radio stations and television stations. There were 50
independent companies by 1983. By late 2004, the majority of
all media companies in the United States were controlled by
just five companies. In the United States, five huge
conglomerates control the vast majority of media in the United
States: Time Warner, Disney, News Corp, Bertlesmann, and
Viacom. G.E. is a close 6th place. Together, they own about
90% of the media. What do you think are the pros and cons of
a handful of corporations owning most of the main media
outlets?

Examples of government management of the news:
◦ In 2007, FEMA held a press conference. However, no
reporters were present. Instead, FEMA staff members
sat in the audience and asked questions.
◦ In 2005, syndicated columnist Michael McManus was
paid $10,000 by the Department of Health and
Human services for writing about one of the
government’s Marriage Initiative programs. The title
of his column happened to be entitled “Ethics and
Religion.”
◦ How independent were the independent military
analysts on some of the major news stations?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/2
0generals.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=
all

The US military has banned the American
media of taking pictures of caskets returning
from war since 1991. Some journalists ask
what that has to do with national security.
What do you think? Is it proper for the
government to manage the news in this way?