Florida plans to become first state to eliminate all childhood vaccine mandates

[Scott]

Sure, and I certainly believe that cells exist, as well as bacteria. I also suspect that some microbes that are classified as biological viruses are actually bacteria. The issue here is not that people don't see microbes that are labelled as biological viruses in electron microscopes. The issue is whether they actually fit the description of actual biological viruses.

You might enjoy this.....I have only just started so I dont know how good it is yet:

I listened to the first 15 minutes, looked good. It didn't talk about evidence, or lack thereof, of biological viruses though, as far as I could tell.

 

[Scott]

False. Here's what I asked ChatGPT just now:

We both already discarded ChatGPT as an erroneous source.

I certainly agree that ChatGPT makes mistakes. But to simply discard it as an erroneous source is going too far. I suspect that -everyone- makes mistakes. The key is to see where they shine. I think of ChatGPT as quite similar to Wikipedia in some ways- not always right, but great for a starting point.

If you want to bring it back then you have to accept the ChatGPT output that I posted.

I believe the output you're referring to had to do with the definition of definition. I remember saying that ChatGPT can sometimes give different definitions on a given word depending on the question asked and I certainly stand by that. Ironically, it actually reinforces my point that definitions have different definitions, including the word definition itself.

 

[Scott]

What's the difference between a definition or definitions of a word and the use or uses of a word?

Don't you think you should have asked me that up front?

I distinctly recall telling you that I didn't see a difference between them.

... and you distinctly recall never having asked me.

I literally -told- you that I didn't see a difference.

You don't get to say that you don't see the difference that I am spelling out for you.

IBDaMann, if you are asking me to take your definition of the term definition or that of a dictionary, I'm taking the dictionary's, specifically one that I tend to rely on, The American Heritage Dictionary, 5th Edition. Here are its first 3 definitions of the word definition:
**

• noun A statement of the meaning of a word, phrase, or term, as in a dictionary entry.
• noun A statement or description of the fundamental character or scope of something.
• noun The act or process of stating a precise meaning or significance; formulation of a meaning.

**

Source:

definition — definition, examples, related words and more at Wordnik

All the words

www.wordnik.com

 

[Into the Night]

Sure, but I also get to choose how much linked material I respond to.

I don't respond to linked material. If I respond, I respond to you.

I responded to that post in my post #827. Quoting from it:
**
This seems rather akin to you equating abortion with contract killings. Don't get me wrong, I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are others who feel the same way you do. I'm just not someone of that persuasion.

Repetition fallacy (chanting). Redefinition fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

I think your "whatever" says it all. You seem to simply be assuming that I have ignored evidence.

You do. You also ignore English, history, science, logic, and mathematics.

I still remember when you suggested that I might be right concerning the lack of evidence that biological viruses exist. What changed?

What do you consider a 'biolgical virus'?

 

[Into the Night]

No, I was referring to you.



No, I'm saying that it's easy to preach or proclaim just about anything.

You oughtta know.

What's generally much harder is to provide solid evidence for a lot of those claims.

You ignore evidence, English, history, logic, science, and mathematics.

 

[Into the Night]

I’m over 65 and can’t get a COVID vaccination and it’s blowing up in Houston.

The emergency rooms are full of COVID patients.

Covid isn't an emergency.
Since you can't seem to find your way out of your own house, that's YOUR problem.

 

[Into the Night]

Michigan will allow seniors to vaccinate.

What's to 'allow'. If you are addicted to annual flu shots and covid vaccinations, you can get 'em. Of course, your addiction is YOUR problem.

 

[Into the Night]

I literally -told- you that I didn't see a difference. If you didn't understand why I didn't see a difference, you could have asked me at that point. But you didn't, so I finally decided to ask you myself as to what difference you saw.

Void argument fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Like me, ChatGPT doesn't seem to see a difference between definitions and descriptions. Quoting my question and ChatGPT's response:
**
Do dictionaries provide common definitions for words?

ChatGPT said:​

Yes — that’s a good way to put it.

Dictionaries provide common definitions (or descriptions) of how words are most often used. They don’t give every possible meaning, but they usually cover:

• Primary/common meanings (the sense most people think of first).
• Secondary meanings (other established uses).
• Specialized or technical meanings (for particular fields, if relevant).

In short: dictionaries aim to give you the shared, widely understood meanings of a word so people can communicate more clearly.
**

False authority fallacy. Word games.

 

[Into the Night]

False. Here's what I asked ChatGPT just now:
**
What criteria do dictionaries use to decide which definitions for words are put in as entries?
**

Here's ChatGPT's response:
**
Good question! Dictionaries don’t just throw in every possible meaning of a word—they follow careful criteria, and the exact process depends on whether it’s a general-use dictionary (like Merriam-Webster or Oxford English Dictionary) or a specialized one. The main criteria are:


1. Evidence of Use (Attestation)

• Lexicographers look at corpus evidence (large databases of real-world texts) to see if a word or meaning is actually used by many speakers or writers.
• A new definition usually needs to appear in multiple independent sources over time, not just in one-off cases.

2. Frequency

• If a meaning shows up often enough in print, online, and spoken usage, it’s more likely to be included. Rare or fleeting uses usually don’t make it in.

3. Breadth of Use

• A definition has to be recognized by a wide enough group of people, not just a single community, unless the dictionary is specialized (like legal or medical dictionaries).

4. Longevity / Staying Power

• Dictionaries don’t want to chase every passing slang trend. They look for persistence: does the usage stick around, or does it vanish after a season?

5. Clear Meaning

• The meaning has to be distinct enough from other senses of the word. If it’s just a tiny nuance, lexicographers may fold it into an existing definition instead of giving it its own entry.

6. Documented Sources

• Traditionally, dictionaries relied on published books, newspapers, and academic texts. Today, they also track social media, blogs, TV transcripts, and other digital sources, but still require verifiable, recordable use.

So in short: a definition gets in if it’s repeatedly attested, broadly and clearly used, and durable enough to matter to readers.


Do you want me to give you an example of how a dictionary added a new sense of an existing word (like mouse → computer device) and how they justified it?
**

False authority fallacy. Dictionaries to not define any word.

 

[Into the Night]

No- I suspect that -all- communication between people has a bearing on society in the long run.

That's assuming you can communicate. You seem to have a real problem with this. Try learning English.

The issue here is that when people need to agree on specific definitions of a word, they can certainly do so. The problem is when people want their particular definition/usage/description/sense of a word, to be the one used in a discussion at the expense of their ideological opponent's.

You have to learn the language first.

 

[Into the Night]

Agreed. For the audience, I get into an example where it really -does- matter in the abortion thread I created, here:

Post in thread 'Abortion'

Today at 9:03 AM

If you and I define a word, we must both use that same definition or we are in breach and errors result, software doesn't work, bridges collapse, space shuttles explode, one of us is in breach of contract, etc.

Only if we're dealing with things like programming, engineering and the law. Regular conversations don't have such strict rules.

The less bearing it has on society, the fewer the rules.

Sure. I think it also bears mentioning that in our discussions regarding abortion, agreeing on the meanings/definitions/descriptions/usages of certain words becomes...

• Scott

Repetition across threads. Repetition fallacy (chanting).

 

[Phantasmal]

Michigan will allow seniors to vaccinate. You have a Republican rule, it will be tough to get them. Steve Martin had to cancel some comic dates because he has Covid.

CVS finally got some in and I will go next Monday to get both flu and COVID, though the Moderna is still not available, just Pfizer. I’ve always gotten the Pfizer vax and booster.

 

[Into the Night]

Here is the core of our problem. We can't agree on the definitions/usages/descriptions of certain words and you also refuse to accept any of the dictionary and encyclopedia definitions I have offered. If this doesn't change, we have effectively reached a dead end on the subjects that deal with these words.

Go learn English.
You can't learn English from a dictionary.

 

[Into the Night]

-You- believe they are "obvious and straigihtforward". I have noted that your definitions are not to be found in the dictionary entries I've read.

Irrelevance fallacy.

 

[Into the Night]

Do you notice how you are using a different word than I am? I am saying definition, you are saying defined. They don't mean the same thing. We certainly need to agree on the definition of a given word for certain subjects. In other words, we need to agree on how we are defining a given word for a conversation. That doesn't mean that said word can't have other definitions, just that they aren't the ones we're using for said hypothetical conversation.

Word games. Go learn English.

 

[Into the Night]

I'm curious how you went from believing that biological viruses might not exist to assuming that I am ignoring evidence that they do.

What is a 'biological virus'?

 

[Into the Night]

CVS finally got some in and I will go next Monday to get both flu and COVID, though the Moderna is still not available, just Pfizer. I’ve always gotten the Pfizer vax and booster.

Ooo. You ARE addicted!

 

[Into the Night]

I certainly agree that ChatGPT makes mistakes. But to simply discard it as an erroneous source is going too far.

Nope. You can't use ChatGPT to define words. False authority fallacy.