Talk:Fegeism
Deletion
Now that the "MemeShock language" has been removed from Essay:Best_New_Conservative_Words, I'd like to suggest that this page and any others be removed as well. The methodology of this program has been rejected by Aschlafly and others, given CP's advocacy of open-mindedness and free speech to settle ideological disputes, rather than deception. Jfraatz's title "Engineered Language using a Linguistic Deep Structure Algorithm" appears to be utter gibberish (pending his response; see the relevant section of Talk:Essay:Best_New_Conservative_Words); given this I suspect that he is either a parodist, dishonest, or a pseudo-intellectual doofus of the highest order. In none of these cases is there any reason for CP to continue to be a part of this "social experiment". Perhaps Mr. Raatz could first outline his proposals in the Essay: space. --JimR 22:18, 1 December 2009 (EST)
- I agree. We are open-minded and reluctant to quash any intellectual activity, but the above-described unthinking silliness looks like it should be the exception that proves the rule.--Andy Schlafly 22:50, 1 December 2009 (EST)
MemeShock Algorithm
Hold on guys:
You misinterpreted what I meant by engineering words with a deep-structure algorithm. What we do is engineer SETS of words and then find ways to link them back to each other in an (indirectly) circular way.
See the language is inherently circular in itself. If you look up a word that word is defined by more words and so on ad infinitum, however at some point with a finite language size the definitions must loop back on themselves. That's where the deep-structure comes in. We've got the "loop back" structure in a box so that we can use it to engineer sets of interweaving terms.
More here: http://www.facebook.com/groups/edit.php?gid=12621914298#/topic.php?uid=12621914298&topic=4607
"Fegeism" could stand on it's own as well.
I know you don't like the methodology I used to think up terms like fegeism, but the term could stand on it's own as well. I mean when pro-aborts completely ignore the fetal child in a debate about abortion and try to mock you whenever you bring it up, that is a sort of discrimination there. Logically they are being ageists with respect to people who are still in the womb. Hence "fetal ageists" is not inaccurate in a honest sense. Johanan Raatz