- Joined
- Aug 16, 2015
Not all dictionaries or encyclopediae are equal in quality or intellectual integrity. From your studies and experience, what are the best reference works to use as we learn more about the Civil War and related subjects?
Boy, what a bad definition. Surprised that merriam websters would use such a politically loaded lost cause definition.well it is in the dictionary........
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Radical Republican
would assume Lincoln/Johnston's position of a more conciliatory nature and trying to hasten reunion would represent a more moderate position
So enforcing civil rights laws us oppressive? I agree with @Pat Young it is a horrible Lost Cause definition. I guess peer Merriam Webster the KK K us a benevolent white civil rights group.well it is in the dictionary........
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Radical Republican
would assume Lincoln/Johnston's position of a more conciliatory nature and trying to hasten reunion would represent a more moderate position
by all means ignore sourced definition's and make up your own, this will be interesting down the road........So enforcing civil rights laws us oppressive? I agree with @Pat Young it is a horrible Lost Cause definition. I guess peer Merriam Webster the KK K us a benevolent white civil rights group.
Leftyhunter
Why not use the sourced definition from Britannia at encylopedia.com? Much more detailed and accurate.by all means ignore sourced definition's and make up your own, this will be interesting down the road........
Miriam Webster's is obviously just a hack dictionary that everyone should throw away. In total agreement with you, so don't argue
Why? Webster's is a generally respected source.....if we are going to disregard sources if they don't fit ones narrative, why provide others? They can simply be disregarded too............Why not use the sourced definition from Britannia at encylopedia.com? Much more detailed and accurate.
Leftyhunter
Nothing wrong with pointing out a flaw in a source.Why? Webster's is a generally respected source.....if we are going to disregard sources if they don't fit ones narrative, why provide others? They can simply be disregarded too............
Miriam-Webster's has been used as a source in several other threads, if its not a credible source shouldn't we discontinue relying on it at all?
Probably really should get libraries, colleges, and schools from relying on it as well...........