Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You do realize that when you look up the synonyms to misleading you get many of the same results, right?

I'm sorry that you feel the word disingenuous has too strong a negative connotation but I won't curb my speech because of your opinion. If I were to follow that line of thinking I'd have also used a word other than critique because many people foster the opinion that it too has a strictly negative connotation.



Disingenuous means "not of noble character", and more generally means things along the lines of "deliberately dishonest". "Disingenuous" does not mean "misleading, maybe by accident". It's an attack on someone's character.

So, if you wanted to say "misleading, maybe accidentally", you used the wrong word.

Maybe over time, people are evolving toward using the four-syllable word as a one-to-one replacement for the three-syllable word, as a way of disingenuously suggesting they're better educated than they are? If so, eventually, that'll be the most common usage, and thus what the word "means". I don't think we're there yet.

I came for the pedantry, but I'll stay for an opinion: For myself, I agree with the wording you used in the first comment, that calling that list "everything you need to know about web development" is such a high degree of bullshit that no one of noble character would do that. I believe it to be deliberately deceptive self-promotion.

Back on the pedantry, I find it hard to believe that you actually meant "foster" where you wrote that. I mean, who cares how many people foster the opinion that "critique" has a strictly negative connotation... isn't the real issue how many people hold that opinion?


I actually agree with you that it was deliberate to some extent which is why I used the wording "too strong a negative connotation". I think anytime you are accusing someone of being less than entirely honest, which is the definition of disingenuous[1], that it's going to carry at least a semblance of negativity. This is also why I added the caveat "too critically" to my original comment because although I felt the poster was aware of his word choice he was just writing what he thought was catchy marketing copy.

And no, I actually meant to use the word foster. While you're probably right that the larger issue is how many people hold the opinion, for me personally its about how many people vocally defend the opinion (i.e. promote). For instance, if you and Shawn didn't feel the need to defend your position on disingenuous it would be a non-issue because people would at worst understand what I meant by context. This method of understanding by context is the exact mechanism by which our wonderful language evolves over time so while those who hold an opinion of a definition will eventually go away those that foster an opinion on a definition can have a long lasting impact on our language.

[1] "not truly honest or sincere" - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disingenuous

"slightly dishonest; not speaking the complete truth" - http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/british/dising...

"not candid or sincere, typically by pretending that one knows less about something than one really does." - http://oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english...


I'm not asking you to censor your speech. Your use of the word seemed to be at odds with the part of your comment that claimed that it was not a strong critique.

The problem with synonyms is that synonyms are not perfectly equivalent, so you can use them to support a lot of false equivalencies. On the other hand, it's difficult to capture subtle connotations of words in a discussion, and synonyms are kind of the best tool available for getting across that shorthand. It's still a rather inadequate tool. I would say that "disingenuous" being a synonym of "misleading" is itself misleading, because the word "misleading" is neutral to intent where disingenuous is not.

Regarding the word "critique" (especially that form of the word, as opposed to "criticism"), I would say that there's a broadly used academic usage of that word that contains no negative connotation.

Honestly, I have no problem with the word disingenuous. If you were saying that the site developer was intentionally misleading people, then I agree with your usage of the word. But the way that I read your entire comment led me to a different interpretation, and thus my comment.

I'm not asking you to censor your speech. Your use of the word seemed to be at odds with the part of your comment that claimed that it was not a strong critique.

The problem with synonyms is that synonyms are not perfectly equivalent, so you can use them to support a lot of false equivalencies. On the other hand, it's difficult to capture subtle connotations of words in a discussion, and synonyms are kind of the best tool available for getting across that shorthand. It's still a rather inadequate tool. I would say that "disingenuous" being a synonym of "misleading" is itself misleading, because the word "misleading" is neutral to intent where disingenuous is not.

Regarding the word "critique" (especially that form of the word, as opposed to "criticism"), I would say that there's a broadly used academic usage of that word that contains no negative connotation.

Honestly, I have no problem with the word disingenuous. If you were saying that the site developer was intentionally misleading people, then I agree with your usage of the word. But the way that I read your entire comment led me to a different interpretation, and thus my comment.

P.S.

I've noticed that a lot of people on HN use disingenuous in this way that is more or less a direct synonym of "misleading", but outside of HN, I encounter the word much less frequently, and generally it is used in an accusatory tone. Of course language can mutate within communities and subcultures, and that's fine, but using the word disingenuous without implying negative intent carries the risk of offending someone accidentally. I liken the difference between the two words to that of the words "lie" and "misspeak". If you meant to tell someone that they misspoke, but used the word "lied" instead, they would tend to get offended and/or defensive, even though you clearly were not trying to hurl an accusation of ill intent at them. There would be some uncomfortableness created by the miscommunication that was completely unintended and unnecessary. That's the reason that I spoke up about it. I see the potential for unnecessary miscommunication.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: