Stephen Hawking Thinks Aliens Likely

OMNIpotusCOM writes "Noted astrophysicist Stephen Hawking thinks that alien life is likely, albeit primitive, according to a lecture delivered at George Washington University in honor of NASA's 50th anniversary. It begs the question of if we need to consider a Prime Directive before exploring or sending signals too far into the depths of space."

Comments

Other News

[Cctoide]

Scientists Prove Headline Simplification Sometimes Deleterious Headline Intelligibility.

Film 11, Tuned.

Depends; phrases like this are a red flag.

[hey!]

Misusing "begs the question" is actually worse than mixing up the case of pronouns. Mixing up "I" and "we" just doesn't sound right. Misusing "begging the question" can lead readers to make incorrect inferences.

It is often correctly pointed out that phrases and words change their meanings over time, and that ultimately no harm is done as long as the reader is aware of whether the modern or antiquated sense is being used by the writer. However, it is seldom noted that this process is not accomplished at a single instant. This means that there is a considerable period in which deliberate or accidentally misleading use can occur.

It is not even the case that "beg the question" has flipped meanings; it is still in common use in its original sense. A close analogy would be the use of "literally" to mean "very", a sense in which it may well be heard more frequently than in the standard one. "Literally" still means "not in a metaphorical sense". However, we know when an overheated sportscaster says that a linebacker "literally tore off the quarterback's head," he doesn't mean that, in plain fact, the quarterback's head has parted company with his torso.

The misuse of "begging the question" is likewise detectable by common sense. In the standard sense, if question A begs the question B, then an answer must be determined for B prior to raising A. The classic example is "Have you stopped beating your wife?" The incorrect ("colloquial" if you will) sense of the phrase means exactly the opposite: by asserting that B is a natural thing to ask after you have an answer for A, you logically don't need an answer to B before you consider A.

This isn't just a usage quibble; the non-standard use of "begging the question" is potentially much more harmful than "literally"/"very", because it can sometimes mask an attempt to assert two incompatible things at the same time. This most often occurs in an argument against something in which a writer is not forthright about his actual justifications.

As an example, consider this: "The committee report says we only have half as many math elementary school math teachers as we need. This begs the question of whether we can afford them." The speaker is not claiming any burden of proof other than that if we are thinking about doubling the number of math teachers we'll certainly want to know how much it will cost. However, he is also asserting it is meaningless to consider the question of whether more teachers could raise math performance until a budget debate has taken place, an assertion that carries a much higher burden of proof.

Really, it is the habit of reflexive verbal amplification that has to be watched. It is usually just harmless posturing, but it can also easily mask an attempt to twist words so that they support a conclusion that is unjustified by their semantics.

It is not so much the case that bad writing ought to be derided, as it is the case that it should be distrusted. Clear thought is seldom expressed in sloppy writing, but sloppy thought often is.