jkeyes1000 wrote:
You keep calling it my definition, as if you hope to marginalise it. I quoted The Oxford English Dictionary, Mr. Henderson.
"Nonsense"?
It is a pity we have to go over this again, but it appears that you will not get it. A lie is an INTENTIONALLY false STATEMENT. Not an intentionaly false impression. They are not the same.
If Slydini had said, "Now that the paper ball is in this hand, I want you to watch closely"- that would have been a lie. What he would say is, "Watch carefully. I put the ball in my hand..."
Which was not a lie. He did put it in his hand, albeit very briefly.
Your definition of "lie" is not the first one in any dictionary that I am familiar with. The primary definition is the proper one. The others are less authorataive, generally from the vernacular. An example might be the colloquial usage of "living a lie". But such dramatic interptetations are not to meant to supplant the literal meaning.
As for your Star Wars references: I never suggested that all ilusions constitute magic. I said that filmed versions of magical effects belong in the "magic" genre, just as music videos belong in the "music" category. Whether they are "live or Memorex" notwithstanding.
1) sorry, in my example i stopped on a page and merely said 121. i never said that was page 121, did i? so my verbal statement isn't false is it. it's my handling and attitude that suggests i'm looking at the page i'm talking about that is false, which according to your 'theory' isn't a lie. right?
2) ah. the oed. shame they don't hold themselves to the same standard that you do. this is from their site:
"The Oxford English Dictionary is not an arbiter of proper usage, despite its widespread reputation to the contrary."
3) you may not know this but the oed is a descriptive dictionary. that means it attempts to describe the actual use of words - in other words, their use in the vernacular.
in fact the way the first one (oed) was written relied entirely on extracting a words meaning from usage. i learned that in a bio called the professor and the madmen. this suggest knowing something about your topic is wise before commenting on it.
4) the actual definition from the oed reads:
An intentionally false statement.
‘they hint rather than tell outright lies’
‘the whole thing is a pack of lies’
More example sentencesSynonyms
1.1 Used with reference to a situation involving deception or founded on a mistaken impression.
‘all their married life she had been living a lie’
it's hard to claim that 1.1 is a nonstandard or outdated definition of the word, especially when the oed itself doesn't mention anywhere that is how it is arranged.
5) filmed magic may 'belong to a sub category' of magic but not all films are magic - except by your definition which suggests that magic is merely an effectively produced illusion. that's the definition of magic you have backed, not me.
if that's all that magic is, then any film is identical to magic. this suggests your definition is flawed because, as anyone who has studied the history of definitions knows, a good definition not only accurately describes what a thing is but also excludes that which it isn't.
your 'defense' is flawed on many levels. 1) a music video could just as rightfully be considered a category of film and not music.
2) all music is composed of sounds but not all sounds are music. So a tape of traffic wouldn't necessarily be considered a category of music. could it? yes. so obviously the critical element isn't just sound.
had you spend any time studying those 'portrait painters' you dismiss you would have already been exposed to these issues. you're really in well over your head here. you might want to spend some more time with books and less with 'databases'
i almost hate having to say it again - but you're wrong.
about almost everything.
that's quite the accomplishment.
