The word democracy has multiple definitions.

I will stipulate to pro’s definition of the word “definition” which reads: “a formal and concise statement of the meaning of a word, phrase, etc; specification of the essential properties of something, or of the criteria which uniquely identify it.” Analyzing the Resolution: The resolution states “The word democracy has multiple definitions.” PRO defines “definition” as “(1) a formal and concise statement of the meaning of the word, phrase, etc.” and (2) a “specification of the essential properties of something, or the criteria which uniquely identify it.” Because PRO has offered two components of a definition, it is necessary that he satisfy both conditions for multiple definitions (according to his standard for “definition”), to sufficiently meet his BOP, pursuant to his definition which will serve as the framework of this debate. PRO contends that CON’s BOP is to argue “that the word democracy has only one definition.” While I am required to satisfy both components of a “definition” as well, to satisfy my BOP I must only demonstrate that democracy has one definition. 1. Mere meanings of words are not definitions. The meaning of a word is “the thing one intends to convey especially by language” or “something meant or intended” when one employs a given word in speech or writing [1]. Meanings may and often do vary according to context, but a definition “specifies the essential property of something” rather than any given isolated meaning it is appropriate to distinguish the two. The meaning or a word, in relationship to the definition of a word, functions then as criteria which uniquely identify it. The definition, then, is the sum of all potential meanings. For example: conceive of a word, W, which has the various meanings, X, Y and Z. Where I may refer to that word, W, in a sentence, depending on context, while the meaning may vary, the word may be appropriately used to convey the various meanings X, Y and Z. Since it is the task of the definition of a word to encapsulate all possible meanings, that the essential property of the word may be understandable, X, Y and Z are components of the definition of W, rather than independent definitions in and of themselves. To say that X, Y and Z are definitions independent of one another is to negate the possibility of a definition capable of capturing the essential property of a word, where the word in question W, may refer to meanings X, Y or Z. As such, words have multiple meanings, but the sum of those meanings (i.e. all potential meanings of a word) comprise the word’s definition. 2. The word “democracy” has multiple meanings. The word “democracy” has multiple meanings, as many words do, which convey varying ideas according to the context in which the word democracy is used. For example, beneath Webster’s entry titled “Definition of Democracy,” several meanings follow. Among them include “1a: government by the people; especially: rule by the majority, b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system or representation usually involving periodically held free elections. 2: a political unit that has a democratic government. 3 capitalized: the principles and policies of the Democratic party in the United States. 4: the common people especially when constituting the source of political authority. 5: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges.” Where the word “democracy” is used in speech or writing, it is permissible that it could refer to any of these possible meanings, depending on the context in which the word was employed. It is the sum of all conventionally understood meanings of a word, however that makes up a definition. No singular meaning of the word “democracy,” such as those listed within the definition above, may be regarded as a definition itself. Because the isolated meaning only encapsulates a component of the meaning of the independent word (where the independent word is not set in context), they serve only as components of a broader definition, so long as the word “democracy” may refer to meanings other than any singular one listed above. 3. The word “democracy” has only one definition. It is the function of the definition of a word to “define” the word in question independent of context by expressing potential meanings. Meanings themselves are distinct from definitions because only the sum of all potential meanings are sufficient to provide the criteria to uniquely identify a word independent of context. While multiple meanings do exist for the word “democracy,” no singular meaning is sufficient to define democracy independently of context, because multiple meanings do not (and thusly can not) constitute multiple definitions. Democracy, therefore, can have only one definition, which is the sum of all its legitimate potential meanings. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.merriam-webster.com...