Language and Logic (General)

by dhw, Wednesday, April 02, 2014, 23:36 (3676 days ago) @ Balance_Maintained

ROMANSH: My Concise Oxford gives being the primary cause as the sixth meaning. And gives an example of an electrical short circuit being responsible for a fire.

TONY: No, I was not completely unaware of the misuse of the word, and apparently neither are numerous dictionaries. Out of 8 that I checked, only 2 had that listed as a possible meaning.
-I must confess, I'm disappointed at the turn this discussion has taken! I have seven dictionaries here (I tend to buy new ones and keep the old ones) and only one of them omits the meaning of "being the cause". Romansh's example is perfectly normal English. I don't know if this might be a difference between British and American English, though I do have one American dictionary which also gives the above meaning. But it is the following that disturbs me more.
 
ROMANSH: I did not say people can't be held responsible, actually quite the opposite. But in the same sense the sun is responsible for hurricanes. Are you denying the sun is responsible for a good chunk of the weather we get?-TONY: So, according to your rather confusing world view, should we punish the sun for the deaths of thousands of people, or should we let murders get off scott free without consequence, as, according to you at least, they have the same level of agency? (which is to say none at all)
-It is Romansh who has pointed out to Tony the double meaning of "responsible" (which Tony, in my view quite wrongly, calls a misuse), and yet it is Romansh who insists on twisting the meaning. This, I fear, is a deliberate case of distortion, since Romansh has obviously studied ALL the dictionary definitions, but then claims that people are to be held responsible IN THE SAME SENSE as the sun. When we say that Hitler was responsible for the deaths of millions of Jews, Romansh knows we mean that he was to blame, he chose to do this, and was perfectly aware of what he was doing. (That does not mean that he had free will ... I am ONLY talking about the meaning of the word "responsible".) But when we say the sun is responsible for certain kinds of weather, we mean it is the cause, and not that it has made a deliberate choice. Of course nobody will deny that the sun is responsible for certain kinds of weather, so what is the point of the question? By claiming the two meanings are the same, Romansh is twisting language into a false logic, which is precisely the error I had hoped we could avoid. Romansh does not need such a tactic to make the case against free will, and since he agreed with much of what I wrote in my first post, I have to say I am deeply disappointed that he has now deliberately resorted to it! I shall have a little sob into my pillow. Good night, folks.