the power of little words

Anyone who has read or listened to my pondering knows full well my obsession with words. I think the integrity of the meaning of words is at the heart of the issue of subjective and absolute truth. The reason I am so passionate about the precision of words is the stealth power words have on how we think, feel and act.

I have written before about the word "suffer" and how the different ancient ideas are collapsed into the one English word "to suffer". In doing so, the nuanced differences are lost and the impact of an ancient writing about truth is impotent. So, power is definitely found or lost in the precision of words.

Interestingly, it can be the very little words that can send us down the right or wrong path in our thinking. I have written about "obligation" and how two different views of its meaning makes a huge, if not life changing effect on us. The difference actually manifests itself in two little words: "for" and "of".

One meaning of "obligation" or "ought to" invokes a condition "for" and the other invokes a condition "of". For example, if we say that an introvert "ought to" be shy and quiet around people. We can mean that a condition "for" being an introvert is that a person act this way, OR we can mean that a condition "of" being an introvert is that a person acts this way. The first use of "ought to" ("for") implies that we choose to act a certain way in order to become something, like an introvert. The other means that because we are a certain way, like an introvert, we have no choice or at least it is natural for us to act a certain way. The difference is profound. The first assumes that we can become something (introvert) by what we do. The second assumes we do what we do because we already are that something (introvert). The difference is how we understand the meaning of personality and how personality affects our lives.

Let's look at another example. Suppose we say "in a good marriage the partners 'ought to' be faithful." If we take the first view of 'ought to', then we mean that fidelity is a condition FOR a good marriage. If we take the second meaning of 'ought to', then we mean that fidelity is a condition "OF, or what naturally flows from a good marriage. The implications of how two married people grasp the notion of marriage "obligation" of fidelity has monumental impact on how each partner views each other and the relationship.

If you take this same idea of "obligation" in your relationship with God, there is an even greater impact on the quality of your spiritual life.

You may think the difference is academic and makes no difference or you may just not like to ponder. That is, of course, your prerogative. Whether you consider the difference or not is not the deciding factor on whether the "little" difference really has BIG power......