[lbo-talk] Marx without quotation marks

[Philip Pilkington]

>
> Perhaps the problem is that a term with so many - and such varied -
> definitions has already lost its force of meaning. Some of what you
> described - and definitions 5 and 6 - is more precisely identified as
> "forceful, "rude" or "uncivil." I for one think there should be a
> strong demarcation between that and numbers 1 through 4. The word
> would have an unambiguous meaning then.
>
> Percy
>

But I was referring to meaning 3...

Anyway, you can't just impose meanings on words, that's not how language
works. And besides its fascinating to see what meanings are employed at what
periods of time... it can tell you so much about the culture at that time
and what its repressing, which meanings its concealing.

Remember the key to Freud's analytic technique was to show people that the
things they said meant two completely different things. So when someone
said: "Last night on the way home I was pulling off from the curb and had to
stop quickly. The car jerked off its wheels and I shot out of my seat.", the
wily analyst would ask them if they were masturbating earlier that day to
which they'd reply "Well, yes, how did you know."