Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zendawn
No the only circular argument is yours.
I have not picked the definition that appears the best, I have pick the definition that by the rules of language applies in this case.
Discrimintion as defined by 'the cognitive process whereby two or more stimuli are distinguished' could in no way apply in this case.
I thought we were having a proper discussion but I can see your only interested in rhetoric and point scoring.
Not allowing men(gay or straight) to wear earrings, while allowing women to, is discrimination pure and simple.
If the gays wanna kick up a fuss, more power to them. Anyone who says they're over reacting is a either a queer hater or closet homophobe.
|
I intend to honour a promise (above) not to keep revisiting logical fallacies, so I am happy to leave it there and let anyone interested in reading this discussion decide whose reasoning best fits the definition.
As for the definition of descrimination, which is nearer to the heart of the topic, the 'cognitive process' definition is not to be so easily dismissed. It serves to point out, quite neatly, that it is possible to speak of discrimination without the very word
necessarily implying something improper or unjustified. So, when you say women being allowed to wear ear rings while men are banned, is discrimination, you are correct. When you say that this is therefore wrong, you are incorrect - especially if the only evidence you have to back this up is a quote from a dictionary which, when you read it in full, does not back up your point of view.