Changes

::In response to DonnyC, choosing conservative words is not a precise science, but it is more scientific than most of what liberals consider to be science.  The conservative nature of nearly every term on the list can hardly be disputed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:33, 10 September 2013 (EDT)

::In response to DonnyC, choosing conservative words is not a precise science, but it is more scientific than most of what liberals consider to be science.  The conservative nature of nearly every term on the list can hardly be disputed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 21:33, 10 September 2013 (EDT)

 

:::Thank you for your thoughts.  However, suppose there was a considerable increase in English word vocabulary from 1600 to 2010.  As the leisure time expanded and the literature expanded, society became more refined in its thinking.  Just as Eskimos developed 100 different words for snow, economic theory and social commentary grew more refined, and the number of words relevant to talking about conservatism grew.  So, we need to control for the total number of English words in active use.  For example, suppose someone developed a list of "liberal words" over time.  It could be that the number of conservative words and the number of liberal words both grew between 1600 and 2010 because the total number of English words grew during that time.  What would be more relevant was whether the ratio of conservative words/total words grew faster than the ratio of liberal words/total words.  In response to DonnyC, one could use other measures of the growth in public acceptance of conservative thought instead of classifying words.  For example, one could look a public opinion polling data, or election results where self-identified conservative candidate ran, or the enactment of key conservative policies over time. Thanks. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:36, 10 September 2013 (EDT)

:::Thank you for your thoughts.  However, suppose there was a considerable increase in English word vocabulary from 1600 to 2010.  As the leisure time expanded and the literature expanded, society became more refined in its thinking.  Just as Eskimos developed 100 different words for snow, economic theory and social commentary grew more refined, and the number of words relevant to talking about conservatism grew.  So, we need to control for the total number of English words in active use.  For example, suppose someone developed a list of "liberal words" over time.  It could be that the number of conservative words and the number of liberal words both grew between 1600 and 2010 because the total number of English words grew during that time.  What would be more relevant was whether the ratio of conservative words/total words grew faster than the ratio of liberal words/total words.  In response to DonnyC, one could use other measures of the growth in public acceptance of conservative thought instead of classifying words.  For example, one could look a public opinion polling data, or election results where self-identified conservative candidate ran, or the enactment of key conservative policies over time. Thanks. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 23:36, 10 September 2013 (EDT)

:I welcome the criticism and doubts.  But I think, upon reflection, that conservative terminology is expected to grow exponentially due to how conservatism is connected more closely to logic than liberalism is.  How often are liberal terms of the 1960s used today?  Not much, nor would one expect the self-centered liberal wording to grow over time, as selfless conservative terms do.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:37, 13 September 2013 (EDT)

:I welcome the criticism and doubts.  But I think, upon reflection, that conservative terminology is expected to grow exponentially due to how conservatism is connected more closely to logic than liberalism is.  How often are liberal terms of the 1960s used today?  Not much, nor would one expect the self-centered liberal wording to grow over time, as selfless conservative terms do.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:37, 13 September 2013 (EDT)