|
posted by Nylorac on August 29th, 2008 at 6:42PM
Ok, so if anarchy is directly from "an archos", AND we're defining the term based solely on its linguistic roots, then "anarchy" can mean:
1. without monarchy
2. without oligarchy
3. no monarchy
4. no oligarchy
But a government is neither a monarchy nor is it an oligarchy ...
hmmm...
|
posted by dennisn on August 29th, 2008 at 6:46PM
You'll notice the roots of the words monARCHY and oligARCHY. A MON-ARCHY is one-man-ruler. An OLI-GARCHY is a group-of-rulers Common sense /should/ lead you to the definition of anARCHY ... NO RULERS.
|
posted by Driusan on August 29th, 2008 at 6:57PM
Ancient Greek morphology is "common sense"?
|
posted by dennisn on August 29th, 2008 at 6:59PM
Yes. I can't think of any confusing examples. It worked beautifully in this case until people fucked it up with entirely unrelated ideas.
|
|
|
|
