[bonoboTP]

I'm really ambivalent about Stallman's language crusades. Similarly to how I dislike the focus on the newest politically correct terminology.

Why is "creative" OK, when "creator" isn't?

I think it's more about the fact that adopting the enemy's language is seen as a kind of submission, a recognition and acceptance of their power over you, even if their words themselves aren't "bad" intrinsically.

Not sure if it's the right hill to die on. Eventually words and meanings readjust to describe reality. Map and territory, you know.

[SuoDuanDao]

Well, there's also the theory - articulated best in Orwell's 1984 of the places I've seen it argued for - that language also shapes what thoughts can be held or shared. Given how much impact choosing the programming language has on a technical project I'm inclined to think there's something to that idea, and Stallman may be more sensitive to that than the average bear.

[Bakary]

In this case the language crusade prompts us to think about our assumptions more deeply. The comment did bring my attention to concepts I had not noticed before.

There is an adversarial aspect to it, but it's no different from debating ideas. You're just questioning certain premises, it doesn't mean you have to discard them afterwards.

[bonoboTP]

Good point. We should notice such shifts in language and what they imply.

[cblconfederate]

Most of these terms came from marketing