The word democracy has multiple definitions.

Definition vs meaning. My opponent has stipulated to a definition for the word “definition” as “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. ” My opponent then discusses the definition of the word “meaning” in contrast to that of “definition. ” I have no problem with the stipulated definition for the word “meaning”, however the distinction that my opponent is trying to draw is incorrect and irrelevant. Citing to no authority, my opponent makes the unsupported argument that a definition “is the sum of all potential meanings” of a word. Such a statement goes against the agreed upon stipulation for the word “definition” (and even against the stipulation which my opponent tried to introduce in Round 1). A “specification of the essential properties of something” =/= “the sum of all potential meanings” of a word. My opponent cannot make the jump that he is trying to make since there is no requirement that a specification of the essential properties of something contain *all* potential meanings (or even all of the potential properties) of a word. There might be disagreement on what the “essential properties” of a word are (such is the case with the word democracy). My opponent could argue that a definition might contain “some of the meanings” of a word. But that leads to there being multiple potential definitions that might contain different sets of meanings for any one word (as happens with the word democracy). [1] A “formal and concise statement of the meaning of a word, phrase, etc. ” =/= “the sum of all potential meanings” of a word. It might contain all potential meanings of a word, but it doesn’t have to. In trying to contain the sum of all potential meanings, the definition would probably not be a “concise” statement, but rather something more like a multi-page article. A specification of “the criteria which uniquely identify” a word =/= “the sum of all potential meanings” of a word. Giving the criteria which uniquely identify a word does not require including all of the potential meanings of the word. If a definition is “the sum of all potential meanings” of a word then many words do not have a definition, since it is nearly impossible to capture all the obscure potential meanings of most words. The word democracy has multiple “meanings” and multiple “definitions. ” The fact that meanings vary by context does not mean that there is only one definition for a word. Even if I were to hypothetically concede that a definition contains multiple meanings or that a definition is “the sum of all potential meanings”, there could still be multiple definitions. The two are not mutually exclusive as definitions can also vary. They can vary by content, style and wording. That is why there is more than one dictionary in the world and why none of them contain exactly the same language for every entry. The word “democracy” has multiple “definitions”[2] as shown by the different definitions provided by Merriam Webster’s dictionary, the Oxford English Dictionary, and The freedictionary. com. These vary in style wording and notably, content, such as whether they include the meaning “a political or social unit that has such a government” which the freedictionary. com includes for the word democracy but the others do not. If there were just one definition for the word democracy, it would be available somewhere. My opponent has not provided us with an example of the single definition for the word democracy that contains the sum of all potential meanings of the word democracy. (Or even a single definition for the word democracy that is THE definition of democracy period). None of the examples for the definition of the word democracy provided by either side is identical, nor do any of them contain “the sum of all potential meanings” for the word democracy. They are simply formal and concise statements of the meaning of the word democracy. In fact there is not a single dictionary on Earth that contains the sum of all potential meanings of the word democracy in its entry for democracy and I highly doubt that my opponent could craft such a definition. My opponent cannot provide a definition of democracy that cannot be varied in content, style and wording. Conclusion: A definition need not show all the potential meanings of a word. It could just show some of the meanings. Definitions vary by content, style and wording. My opponent cannot show that there is only one definition for the word democracy. I have shown that there are multiple definitions for the word democracy by providing examples in my last round. My opponent cannot provide an example of the one definition of the word democracy or show that there is only one definition. Therefore I have met my BOP and my opponent has not met his. Vote Pro! [1] See Round 2. [2] Using the stipulated definition for “definition. ”