Greetings Wordsmiths. I’m sure you’re all here because you know how much Etymonline helps you learn, but I made a YouTube video to initiate the uninitiated.
I discuss the perniciousness of circular definitions and how Etymonline can be an invaluable tool in learning the art of critical, independent thought. You may find it entertaining, insightful, or informative. I would love to know your thoughts!
(Etymonline staff- I’m not sure how often people make video essays about Etymonline, but if you happen to think this one is blog post worthy, I would be delighted, and more than happy to answer any additional questions you may have to make a nice meaty article. Thanks for all you do to caretake this exceptionally important little corner of the interweb.)
I agree with your general thrust here. The need to both take things apart and put things together is quite fundamental and seems to show up just about anywhere. Not overvaluing dictionary definitions also seems essential to the path toward more full understanding of any given word.
This is more my personal perspective, but I would push back on how much you minimize the level of understanding or knowledge someone might have when they don’t examine their language. I’d argue that a person’s understanding should be measured by the extent their language helps them live. There’s a space for mastery of language without really stopping to define anything.
I think explaining words academically is probably more of a individual passion.
“a person’s understanding should be measured by the extent their language helps them live” - I’m not sure if you checked out the part 1, “How To Learn that you know Nothing” (this video is the part 2) but in that video I said almost the same thing in a different way- “our map of the world is only as detailed as we need to bumble through our daily lives”. If your goal is to live your everyday life as efficiently as possible, using as little of your brain’s CPU as needed, then heuristics are the best way to do that. The mode of thought I’m peddling is more of the transcendent visionary type, which is frankly quite inconvenient for the average person. The two modes of thought are equivalent to knowing how to drive a car, versus understanding why the car works. They have mastered the car in different ways!
Bouviers 1856 Law Dictionary has the most complete discussion of ignorance I have found. Understanding is legally the alternative to ignorance while knowing is taking the time and energy to study a topic until you get tired and decide ignorance is preferred.
Here is the Bouviers version of ignorance
IGNORANCE. The want of knowledge.
Ignorance is distinguishable from error. Ignorance is want of knowledge; error is the non-conformity or opposition of our ideas to the truth. Considered as a motive of our actions, ignorance differs but little from error. They are generally found together, and what is said of one is said of both.
Ignorance and error, are of several kinds. 1. When considered as to their object, they are of law and of fact. 2. When examined as to their origin, they are voluntary or involuntary, 3. When viewed with regard to their influence on the affairs of men, they are essential or non-essential.
Ignorance of law and fact. 1. Ignorance of law, consists in the want of knowledge of those laws which it is our duty to understand, and which every man is presumed to know. The law forbids any one to marry a woman whose hushand is living. If any man, then, imagined he could marry such a woman, he would be ignorant of the law; and, if he married her, he would commit an error as to a matter of law. How far a party is bound to fulfil a promise to pay, upon a supposed liability, and in ignorance of the law
Ignorance of fact, is the want of knowledge as to the fact in question. It would be an error resulting from ignorance of a fact, if a man believed a certain woman to be unmarried and free, when in fact, she was a married woman; and were he to marry her under that belief, he would not be criminally responsible. Ignorance of the laws of a foreign government, or of another state; is ignorance of a fact. 9 Pick. 112. Vide, for the difference between ignorance of law and ignorance of fact
