Scott discusses various interpretations and uses of 'sorry' in response to comments on his previous article about the phrase 'I'm sorry you feel that way'. Longer summary

This post highlights comments on Scott's previous article about the phrase 'I'm sorry you feel that way'. It explores various perspectives on the use and interpretation of 'sorry', including its etymological roots and cultural shifts in understanding. Scott discusses the challenges of finding alternative phrases, the potential generational gap in interpreting 'sorry', and the concept of 'hyperstitious slur cascade'. He also reflects on the difficulties of crafting socially acceptable alternatives and the nuances of apologizing without admitting fault. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues that misusing terms like 'democratic' and 'accountable' can inadvertently justify totalitarianism, and suggests more careful usage of these terms. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques the misuse of terms like 'democratic' and 'accountable', arguing that when taken to extremes, they can justify totalitarianism. He illustrates this through examples in religious freedom, charitable donations, and AI development, showing how demands for complete 'democracy' or 'accountability' in all aspects of life can lead to the erosion of personal freedoms. The post suggests that these terms should be used more carefully, with 'democratic' applied mainly to government structures and 'accountable' reserved for specific power dynamics, to avoid inadvertently promoting totalitarian ideas. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander argues against broadening the definitions of words like 'lie' and 'abuse', as it dilutes their meaning and reduces their usefulness in identifying problematic behavior. Longer summary

Scott Alexander argues against broadening the definition of words like 'lie' and 'abuse' to include less severe actions. He contends that this dilutes the meaning of these terms, making them less useful for identifying genuinely problematic behavior. The post discusses how overly broad definitions can lead to everyone being labeled as liars or abusers, which removes the stigma and informational value of these terms. Scott also explains how this can be exploited by bad actors to unfairly stigmatize others. He extends this argument to other terms like 'disabled', 'queer', and 'autistic', suggesting that while some broadening of definitions can be useful, it's never right to define a term so broadly that it applies to everyone or no one. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines the concept of 'laziness' and value differences, exploring how semantic debates can obscure practical communication and understanding. Longer summary

Scott Alexander explores the concept of 'laziness' and debates about value differences. Through a dialogue between Sophisticus and Simplicio, he examines whether laziness exists, how to communicate about people with low motivation, and whether judgments about laziness are moral or practical. The post then extends to discuss punishment, evolutionary psychology, and the nature of value differences. It concludes with a metaphorical conversation about city centers, illustrating how semantic debates can obscure practical communication. Shorter summary

The post presents 50 'Tom Swifties', a form of wordplay involving quotes and related adverbs, demonstrating the author's wit and knowledge across various fields. Longer summary

This post is a collection of 50 'Tom Swifties', a form of wordplay where a quoted sentence is linked to an adverb that relates to the quote in a punning manner. The author extends this concept beyond just Tom, including other characters and historical figures. The puns range from simple to complex, often requiring knowledge of literature, history, or current events to fully appreciate. The post demonstrates the author's wit and extensive knowledge across various fields, while also showcasing their ability to craft intricate wordplays. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander critiques social justice terminology, arguing that words like 'privilege' and 'racism' are used as weapons rather than tools for understanding. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques the use of social justice terminology, particularly words like 'privilege' and 'racism'. He argues that these terms are often used in a way that differs from their stated definitions, serving as weapons to shut down debate rather than as tools for understanding. He uses the concept of 'motte-and-bailey doctrine' to explain how social justice advocates switch between defensible and indefensible positions. The post ends by comparing this behavior to a hypothetical government conspiracy, suggesting that the way these terms are used reveals their true nature as tools of social control. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander humorously criticizes ten irritating internet trends he hopes will end in 2014, ranging from overused words to memes and logical fallacies. Longer summary

Scott Alexander humorously criticizes ten internet trends he wants to stop seeing in 2014. These include overused words like 'fanboy' and 'butthurt', inconsistent arguments about global warming, the doge meme, meta-humor, socioeconomic insults, misuse of 'dude' and 'bro', generational arguments, criticism of girls with male friends, and doge memes referencing the Doge of Venice. He satirically dissects each trend, pointing out their logical flaws or overuse, and occasionally proposes solutions or compromises. The post is written in a sarcastic and exasperated tone, reflecting Scott's frustration with these internet phenomena. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander responds to an essay about trigger warnings in rationalist spaces, arguing that the community's purpose is dispassionate discussion and that everyone, not just marginalized groups, has triggers. Longer summary

Scott Alexander responds to an essay by Apophemi about trigger warnings and discourse in the rationalist community. He argues that the rationalist community is already a 'safe space' for people who want to discuss ideas dispassionately, and that trying to make it safe for everyone would fundamentally change its nature. He shares his own experiences of being triggered by social justice rhetoric, and suggests that everyone has triggers, not just marginalized groups. Scott also discusses issues around language use, slurs, and political correctness, arguing that context and intent matter when determining what language is harmful. Shorter summary