Talk:Globalization

Unquestionably an article to start controversy

I am wedded to little in this, certainly including the workgroups. Globalization, regional alliances, and cultural exchange, however, need to be covered somewhere. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:19, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Enablers?

Really, Howard, isn't that a very loaded, and editorializing, word? Particularly since you don't try to explain it at all or to expand the concept in any way. I really suggest that you find another heading. Hayford Peirce 17:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to substitute something. I said the article was intended to elicit participation on an important issue. Actually, I don't consider "enabler" to be especially loaded. An enabler is anything that assists something to happen; teachers are enablers of literacy. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You know very well what the current meaning is! Hayford Peirce 17:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't. I know some 12-steppers like it. I'm not going to give up rational meanings, or long-established traditions such as anthropomorphizing ships, because you dislike it. As I've said, change it if you like. I have other things to do than argue about the nuanced meaning of a header. Howard C. Berkowitz 17:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not a question of whether I like it or not, it's a question of correct usage, which, in an encyclopedia, ought to be our common goal. The meanings of words change. "Gay", for instance, is not used the same way it was 80 years ago. Ditto for "enablers". In fact, if you would bother to look at the dictionary first, you would see that the 12-step meaning is now the common one. Hayford Peirce 17:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)