Title : The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational."
link : The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational."
The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational."
"There is... more than a hint here of the way in which C.S. Lewis spoke in his wartime BBC radio lectures of 'mere Christianity'.... ... William Butler Yeats wrote ominously of an approaching Second Coming in which the promise of redemption will be replaced by an onslaught of barbarity, and 'Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world'... It doesn’t overpraise, it doesn’t underpraise, it merely tells the truth, and gets to the essence of the matter. Would it not be a vast improvement if we learned to calibrate our language so that it described merely the way things are, and appreciated them for that?"From "Mere/Like a lover of endangered species, the lover of endangered words jumps for joy when he sees a word being rescued" by Wilfred M. McClay (in The Hedgehog Review), looking at a book titled "Mere Civility," by Teresa Bejan.
McClay goes off on the subtleties of "mere," but the book is about the subtleties of "civility" which endeavors to clarify civility:
Bejan’s understanding of civility is not the politeness sought by today’s self-appointed arbiters of public manners and speech... In fact, as Bejan acutely points out, the term civility is often used as a genteel-sounding pretext for the suppression of disfavored views.My line is: Calls for civility are always bullshit. I don't have a problem conceding that the essential idea, separated from the people who call for it, is good, and Bejan's book might be a worthy meditation. McClay turns the spotlight on "mere." I like that.
IN THE COMMENTS: JAORE said: "Too early to think this through. I'll just sit here drinking coffee and petting my mere cat."
Thus articles The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational."
that is all articles The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-word-mere-doesnt-need-to-be.html
0 Response to "The word "mere" doesn't need to be dismissive. It can refer "to something pure, something without admixture, something foundational.""
Post a Comment