StarDestroyer.Net BBS

(NOTE: if this isn't the right forum to put this topic in, I ask it to be moved to a more appropriate place)

According to the dictionary definition an "apologist" is any person defending a specific issue, person etc. from criticism. It might also refer to writers of early christian apologia, but this meaning is rather specific and shall not bother us today. Just going from that, the word appears to be value neutral. Good things, bad things, defending them is apologia and the defender an apologist.

I have been told me that on this board the term "apologist" carries an inherent derogatory meaning, that it's only used to demean the defenders of things commonly seen here as undesirable, like certain religious or political topics. My first question is, is that really so? While I have not seen anyone engaging in apologetics here actually calling himself an apologist, I have not seen anyone objecting to being called one either, but I have not scoured every single thread here so if there're examples I have overlooked, putting them up here would be appreciated.
Second, if it's indeed so that the term is loaded here, should it be so? What would you call people who defend issues that are not seen as inherently bad? Sure, "defenders" is an alternative but the term doesn't carry the specific meaning of "defending from criticism". "Defender" works both in a martial context as well as a non-martial one, "apologist" only works for the latter and that's why I think the term ought not to be reserved for the bad issues.

I think it's mostly a matter of connotation shifting over time; I've seen it elsewhere. People talk about Hitler's apologists, but they rarely talk about Augustus Caesar's apologists*. The term has evolved, not just here but elsewhere, to mean someone who defends a specific issue from extensive criticism, including well-founded criticism of subjects that deserve to be criticized.

Thus, "apologist" tends to connote someone who keeps trying to defend something long after events or time have proven it indefensible.

*As an undergrad, I had a classical history professor who knew one, though...

"Apologist" also evokes the word "apology". You don't apologize for good things, but rather only for bad things, thus implying that the apologist is defending something bad.

Is "apologist" not an accurate term for someone who defends a specific side from criticism even if they are defending it to a fault? Being an apologist when the goal is to objectively analyze the evidence presented is counter-productive, and since objective analysis is one of the things this board does quite often, it should not be surprising that the term is not so neutral here.

Explaining something in detail could be considered an 'apologia'. It doesn't necessarily imply that it is motivated by a desire to change any views (unlike 'revisionism', a similarly maligned word).

The problem is that apologist is almost invariably used in a negative context, Nazi apologist, Holocaust apologist, deist apologist, and so on. The issue isn't the apologist part, its the rest of it. If I were to use a synonym like say "defender" or "proponent" it would be equally harmless on its own or in a different context but honestly how can one interpret "Nazi Defender" or "Holocaust Proponent" in anything but a negative light? Sure its contextual but there is a limited range of potential context for that word.

Beowulf wrote:"Apologist" also evokes the word "apology". You don't apologize for good things, but rather only for bad things, thus implying that the apologist is defending something bad.

I completely agree with this statement. People sling the word "apologist" at someone defending something perceived by the insulter as bad.

Regardless, colloquial usage - especially on a message board with a cliquish membership like this one - dominates, even in the face of technical correctness.

We do not tolerate +1 posts here. If you got nothing to add but still want to agree, at least try to be a bit more creative.

Yes, apologia, apologist and apology, apologize share a root, and that despite the original word meaning "defense, justification". I wonder how it came to be to mean "making up for misdeeds". Maybe it's the same as with the japanese "kisama", which originally was an adress for very high standing people as in "your highness", but through repeated ironic usage became to mean "you bastard". The wonders of etymological evolution.

Todeswind wrote:Holocaust apologist

Thankfully there are actually only few people trying to defend this, most modern nazi sympathizers have taken to denying it happened instead.