Orlando Enrique Fiol
At 04:11 AM 1/2/2021, Hope Williamson wrote:
Nah, I always think click this link etc. Why wouldn't I? It's howDear heart, there's a vital difference between using an acquired term and actually thinking in that terminology. Although I do talk about "watching movies" or "looking for a shirt," I know full well that I am neither watching nor looking with my eyes. Part of the problem, of course, is that these words "watch" and "look" are not intrinsically visual terms at all; they're abstractions. To watch means to observe, not necessarily with eyes. "Look" is a synonym for seek, again, not necessarily with eyes.
It is very telling that you think we should conform to the sighted world, which presupposes its supremacy. You seem incapable of distinguishing between the state of predominance and intrinsic supremacy. Most societies are plagued by this same distinction failure; people believe that whatever ideology, political party, ethnic or racial group finds itself on top is worthy of being there. In most cases, the people on top make it their business to make the rest of us believe that they deserve to be there and that we don't. They also tend to control our civic discourse, censoring the information we get and dictating the terms we use.
Any observant, intelligent person understands that this world is almost entirely designed by, and for, sighted people.
Yet, this does not make the sighted perspective intrinsically superior to blind, deaf or paraplegic
perspectives. Therefore, the choice to adapt to or adopt, sighted terms, is purely pragmatic. In most cases, sightlings understand perfectly well what we mean by "activate" rather than "point and click".