4. Add'tnl note by S. Refoua (not added to email thread)
On June 9th, 2016 Shawn Refoua writes
When I read what you wrote about "Shawn vs. David mentality" I remembered why I originally used the Press vs. Presbyterian concept in connection with "Activism". I think I have a perrrrfect analogy.
My favorite professor, Steven Pinker, describes what its like to sit on the Usage Panel of the American Heritage Dictionary. Every year they discuss whether new words should be added to the dictionary. There are those who have a more puritan sense of the English Language, and others more liberal in their interpretation of when a new word becomes worthy. The factor they all consider important is: How many people understand the word to have the same meaning.
I think this is a great analogy for the discussion on when new drinks become worthy. And the Press/Presbyterian instance is great example. I'd like to scratch my previous definition of activism:
- First I'd like to reference the age old dichotomy: Judicial Restraint vs. Judicial Activism. Here is a simple definition to guide the reference:
- Judicial activism is when a judge issues a ruling based on what he thinks the law "should be", while judicial restraint is issuing one based on what the actual language of the law says right now.
- Whether it benefits students to refer to the "Press" as a separate drink (i.e. is it worthy?):
- First we must evaluate the popularity (number of people) using the name "Press" to refer to a Vodka Press, and whether they expect nothing but Vodka.
- Next: Is the above usage exclusive to certain demographics (i.e. ordered that way only in Nightclubs) or has it transcended across genres?
- Has the drink "split its stock". In other words, are there now variations of the "New" press. If so, we should weigh the difficulty of describing "variations of variations", which is necessary if we teach the "Press" (vodka) as solely a variation of the "Presbyterian".
I hope I'm making sense. I think it's an interesting topic, and becomes the sort of topic we discuss in the future.