Playing with definitions is the hard tell that the opponent is not arguing in good faith and has no good argument to make

I think our culture needs to form a common understanding of what it means to "ban" a book.

To prevent publication?
To prevent sales?
To ban it from public libraries?
To ban it from school libraries?

— Caitlin Flanagan (@CaitlinPacific) May 3, 2023

Flanagan is correct.  We have an Age of Enlightenment approach to things which generally keep us on the path of usefully true and increasing prosperity.  Starting with the ancient Trivium but now rendered as Logic, Reason, Evidence, Empiricism, and the Scientific Method, all these techniques depend for their effectiveness on shared definitions, shared measures, shared meanings.

For those peddling propaganda, beliefs, emotionalism, etc. we have two hundred years of familiarity with the tools which were designed specifically to cut through that twaddle.  

In order to undermine those historically tested and effective tools and techniques, the only techniques available to the authoritarians and fanatics are to stampede people with fear (see Covid-19 for full blown anti-empiricism based on fear propaganda) and playing with definitions.  

Because our First Amendment is so clear and so revered, we have minuscule instances of banned books.  When it does happen, it is contested and overturned.  What we do have are governing authorities who choose to spend on some books over others.  This is not a book ban.  They choose to mark books as appropriate for one age over another.  This is not a book ban.  They choose not to include some books on recommended lists.  This is not a book ban.

It is a wretched habit to try and win an argument by changing the language goal posts but other than using fear, it is the only effective tool available to those opposing the great experiment in the Age of Enlightenment.  It also should always serve as a huge red flag.  

When you see someone manipulating definitions to further their argument, it signifies someone without an argument to be made and someone who is unwilling to respect your own agency.

The response is familiar down through the ages.

Distinguo

Cui Bono

Where's the beef?