<p>^^</p>
<p>I would argue human nature results in nearly everyone being judgemental to some degree. I have not yet met a person who has not made judgements on others.</p>
<p>What do you define as “judgemental?”</p>
<p>My mistake. In that case, I agree. Most people really don’t care.</p>
<p>I judge everything all the time. Usually they are completely arbitrary, subject to whim and mood and the weather. These judgments are always subject to revision for good reason or for none whatsoever. Quite often they are cruel, simplistic, or simply misguided. I love it.</p>
<p>And I’m pretty sure everyone operates this way - we just like to pretend that’s not how it is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>When one uses “judgmental” (note that there’s only one e) to describe someone, the implication tends to be that they’re more judgmental than normal.</p>
<p>That was not the question or definition that was posed. Judgmental is passing a judgment on someone. If they mean someone is “more” judgmental, people add “very” or “so.”</p>
<p>Do you think calling out a spelling error on an internet forum is judgmental?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it’s just an observation of fact.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sometimes…</p>
<p>The definition of a word does not change despite its misuse. Perhaps it is just the people that you know that use judgmental in a negative way, but I hardly think that is indicative of a common tendency. Regardless, the negative implication does not change its accepted definition. It may change your definition, but not its actual definition.</p>
<p>I always laugh when people feel the need to point out spelling errors. What’s the point other than trying to feel some sort of satisfaction?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re kidding right?</p>
<p>girl can still refer to both genders?
silly still means “blessed”?
neck is still used as a reference to land (except for the statement “in my neck of the woods”)?
deer still refers to any animal?</p>
<p>Misuse is generally how words change. It doesn’t make it right, but saying that they don’t change is just false.
Linguistic historian in me decided to come out for a moment. Carry on.</p>
<p>“girl can still refer to both genders?”</p>
<p>what</p>
<p>^ The original meaning of “girl” was any young person. No matter the gender.</p>
<p>Wow, things were messed up back then.</p>
<p>Does gay not still mean happy? Even though it can be used in a negative manner, does not mean it’s definition has changed. It takes decades for a words definition to change.</p>
<p>His point was: judgmental means you are more judgmental than average. Than how would you define a normal level of judgmental, if judgmental now means "more than a normal level of judgmentalness? You can’t redefine a word based on your personal use of it. It takes a prolonged period of time for a word’s definition to change.</p>
<p>As in, if I start calling everything that is stupid “gay,” does that mean gay now means “stupid” and no longer means “happy” or “homosexual?” Even one sub group of a generation is not enough to formally change a word’s nuetrality. </p>
<p>You can’t possibly believe that one person’s misuse of a word changes its societal wide definition. Some people may give a negative conotation of judgmental, but not all people do. A person is judgmental if they pass judgments on other people. It’s pretty straightforward. A persons negative view of that word does not mean its definition changes.</p>
<p>The words you cite have changed over hundreds of years.</p>
<p>This new phenomena of some people defining judgmental in a negative light, even though it’s definition is nuetral, is not correct. It is not consistent with the words meaning.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Judgmental is “misused” by a very large part of the population. It is not one person by a long shot. </p>
<p>I don’t know how long judgmental has had a negative connotation but I, nor anyone I know of, use it in a neutral light. I have only ever heard it be used with a negative connotation.</p>
<p>Well I guess if no one you know uses it properly, that is an accurate prediction of society as a whole…</p>
<p>The act of passing judgment is looked at negatively, not the word itself. The act it describes has a negative connotation, if that makes sense. People interpret the word differently than it actually means.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m sorry, I don’t recall saying that. Could you please show me where that was said, or implied, by myself?</p>
<p>You are implying that since no one you know uses it a certain way, others hold that view. </p>
<p>My point is, even though people use it improperly, that does not mean a large portion of society does. “A person” was a poor phrasing, it should have been “people.” I prefer the singular.</p>
<p>Ugh, whatever.</p>
<p>Yes- I implied others. Not all of society. In fact, I even specified it to just myself and my own experience.</p>
<p>What do you think of people who go on CC and make posts on how awesome they are at balancing everything in college so they can go online and act like a drama queen ;)?</p>
<p>Ancedote to make a greater point. Are others not part of society?
You can have the last word.</p>
<p>I’m not a drama queen, just an ass hole with a low tolerance level.</p>
<p>Ugh, more drama just like high school.</p>