Go!
edit: I have to think about it first thus why I haven't contributed anything yet....
p.s. -- this is LHX's doing. :wink:
"They" is US.
"They" are the powers that be
'They' is the part of us that isnt being us when we say 'They'
Quote from: LHX on December 21, 2006, 07:09:40 PM
'They' is the part of us that isnt being us when we say 'They'
Believe it or not, that's the most accurate description I've heard yet.
Quote from: LMNO on December 21, 2006, 07:11:04 PM
Quote from: LHX on December 21, 2006, 07:09:40 PM
'They' is the part of us that isnt being us when we say 'They'
Believe it or not, that's the most accurate description I've heard yet.
lol
thats like the culmination of all these metaphysic and occult discussion
a retarded sounding sentence
"They" is the 'x' in the algebra of life.
--if "they" = "us" than Y = ?
--if "they" = "not us" than Y = ?
"They" is also part of the Calculus of Society.
--sometimes differentiation
--sometimes integration
...
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on December 21, 2006, 07:14:11 PM
"They" is the 'x' in the algebra of life.
--if "they" = "us" than Y = ?
--if "they" = "not us" than Y = ?
"They" is also part of the Calculus of Society.
--sometimes differentiation
--sometimes integration
...
i had to read this about 7 times, but i think youre on to something with that
"They" have given the world a vast body of wisdom by saying things
eg. They say "it's best not to rock the boat" or They say "you're using only ten percent of your brain"
"They" are responsible for all the "old wives tales", such as "sitting on a public toilet seat can make you pregnant"
"They" are alledgedly behind pretty much every conspiracy theory you care to mention
Sometimes I wonder if "They" are just one person.
if it wasnt for them, we wouldnt be here
fuck this i think i ran my ship into the black hole of cyberspace
im logging off for a few seconds
Aw fuck, now I really have to steal my housemate's copy of "Acts of Meaning". It actually studies the whole idea of shared paradigm and where it all came from - who's the "they" in "they say" and all that.
I'll actually contribute something meaningful once I make sense of the book. I always blow standardized tests out of the water...except in reading comprehension. My brain just doesn't make the same conclusions the testmakers do, I guess. :)
i'd like to give a meaningful explanation of "they," but i'd rather just be honest. "they" is what you, or i anyway, say when there's something going on that you don't like and have no power to change, and you're too lazy to actually find out who or what is responsible. it's easier to say "THEY did it."
"they" don't really exist. "they" are a convenient abstract proxy, like "God" but even closer to our minds, that exists because of our inherent need to encapsulate and compartmentalize everything. "their" identity changes as fast as the context of the discussion, but seldom (except in sloppy speech) do those in the discussion lose track of who "they" are at any given point.
They is what we were before we were us.
They refers back to a subset of those who are not us, but could be us, at any point in the past or future.
I don't find the referentials negative at the outset, as in the us factor, either. It's all in context.
Maybe that's just the linguist in me talking.
well i think it's important that we differentiate between the two types of "they" we often use on these boards:
1 - just coming back from the bathroom, John finds that half his friends have gone out to get some pizza "where did they go?", he asks to the rest.
2 - They want you to be as productive as possible until you're 70.
the first case is just the regular way of referring to a group of people in third person. nothing much out of the ordinary with that (i guess).
the second case, and i agree with vex here, often used when people are too lazy to find out what's really going on. though if you just want to make a point, it can be very useful to take a shortcut like that.
though in such cases i think it would be a bit more useful to word your statement in terms of he Machine or something, if you want to speak as They/Them as some actual anonymous entity, just to make it obvious that you couldn't point out who "They" are, but that They are made up of the sum of stupidity of humanity or some other emergent property of our race.
In the second case, you're speaking of a meme, a "sense". It seems to be an anthropomorphication (christ, is that a word?) of a paradigm that has been set in motion by general attitudes, not by specific people.
Humans seem to want to make non-sentient things "human". This is one more example.
Quote from: LMNO on December 22, 2006, 01:00:38 PM
anthropomorphication (christ, is that a word?)
Anthropomorphosis?
(have to admit tho I like yours better)
I think everyone has made some really good points. I think in large part "they" has become a sort-of referential cop-out. But, I think it largely gets ignored anyway. You hear it all the time from talking heads and pundits. But then again there are lots of referential terms that end up being like that. I think of when the Republicans and Democrats start going at one another. "The Democrats are..." or "The Republicans are..." lumping them all together when it is clear there are members of each party who don't always deserve to be lumped with the whole.
Of course in the media, soundbytes are gold. Long-winded explications and explanations are forbidden. I think people in other realms of life and society fall into it as well. To save time, among other things.