You could make up a new category and call it by the same name as the old category, if what you wanted was to confuse people and make clear thinking more difficult. If you want to define a category without historical baggage, I would prefer that you used a different term so that it was clear that you weren't talking about the concept laden with that baggage.
I don't think many associate the term with the historical baggage here, so its you who are confusing others by using it that way rather than the opposite.
Words evolve in meaning all the time. What's included in "science" now is very different from what was included 500 years ago. Doesn't mean we should create a new term for it each time a new discipline is added.
Why? Can we not define what a professional degree is without the historical baggage?
You could make up a new category and call it by the same name as the old category, if what you wanted was to confuse people and make clear thinking more difficult. If you want to define a category without historical baggage, I would prefer that you used a different term so that it was clear that you weren't talking about the concept laden with that baggage.
I don't think many associate the term with the historical baggage here, so its you who are confusing others by using it that way rather than the opposite.
3 replies →
Words evolve in meaning all the time. What's included in "science" now is very different from what was included 500 years ago. Doesn't mean we should create a new term for it each time a new discipline is added.
maybe we should include alchemy in the list then
Alchemy was a subfield of natural philosophy, not a profession. Its European practicioners had typically studied medicine or theology.
Ever heard of Chemistry?
Chemistry is not alchemy and astronomy is not astrology and philosophy is not divinity.
1 reply →