There are statements which can be more easily misconstrued than others. Therefore there are good and bad slogans. Look at the Democratic 'Love Trumps Hate'. It's horrible because it could be pro-Trump and they're of course enormously hateful while carrying these signs. Also, it is unlikely that we will correct them because this will be used internally. It will show up on some subreddit from which any pro-Trump sentiment is immediately purged. There it will be used to reinforce their pre-existing programming. 'Slogan' btw in its etymological origin means 'battle cry of the dead', isn't that cool Mr. Aquinas?
It doesn't matter if we say "Don't care, still voting Trump" or a more well crafted iteration as this will ultimately be misconstrued by dishonest people.
Some thing are more difficult to be misconstrued, be it wilfull or not. That they will attempt to do so either way is of no significance.
A) Word choice does not prevent dishonest people from lying about what we mean.
B) When told honestly, that slogan has a fine meaning.
C) To ensure the honest meanings of that slogan, which I believe is fine, we should not focus on changing the words, but that we make sure it's told honestly and in context.
It would seem to me you have a disagreement with my first premise (A). Correct me if this is wrong.
If it is the case, would you agree with the premise (!A): Word choice does prevent dishonest people from lying about what we mean?
There are statements which can be more easily misconstrued than others. Therefore there are good and bad slogans. Look at the Democratic 'Love Trumps Hate'. It's horrible because it could be pro-Trump and they're of course enormously hateful while carrying these signs. Also, it is unlikely that we will correct them because this will be used internally. It will show up on some subreddit from which any pro-Trump sentiment is immediately purged. There it will be used to reinforce their pre-existing programming. 'Slogan' btw in its etymological origin means 'battle cry of the dead', isn't that cool Mr. Aquinas?
That statement confuses me. What do you believe my argument to be?
"Therefore, there are good and bad slogans."
Some thing are more difficult to be misconstrued, be it wilfull or not. That they will attempt to do so either way is of no significance.
That's really only one premise of my argument.
Maybe a shorter form might serve us better.
A) Word choice does not prevent dishonest people from lying about what we mean.
B) When told honestly, that slogan has a fine meaning.
C) To ensure the honest meanings of that slogan, which I believe is fine, we should not focus on changing the words, but that we make sure it's told honestly and in context.
It would seem to me you have a disagreement with my first premise (A). Correct me if this is wrong.
If it is the case, would you agree with the premise (!A): Word choice does prevent dishonest people from lying about what we mean?