Talk:Technobabble/Archives/2021

Examples?

This article would greatly benefit from some examples of technobabble.2601:200:C000:1A0:C5F6:C6B1:8D90:D002 (talk) 02:16, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Strongly disagree

The current lede implies that technical jargon which is entirely consistent with some actual body of knowledge fits the term. This is wrong both factually and morally. Technobabble is literally meaningless made up dialog that is used in science fiction, classically Star Trek but most Sci Fi, and is literally babble although it may be plausible to the ignorant. The first sentence is the worst, but the whole lede fosters the impression that people conducting discourse in serious fields that may be incomprehensible to the vast majority of the ignorant and uneducated are also incomprehensible to people who are well informed generally about science and so forth without being necessarily experts in a particular field and are therefore subject to being bamboozled by babble with ill concocted language. This is, in general (transgressive hermeneutics, aside), manifestly not the case in the hard sciences, and the expression of this view is a moral evil I feel necessary to be clear about, the degree of progress to absolute truth in this or that legitimate field of study notwithstanding. Heartily concur with the existing tagging which isn't sufficient. Lycurgus (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

@Lycurgus: I corrected the definition in the lead and also removed a large unreferenced section based entirely on original reaearch. Some properly sourced examples would be beneficial. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:51, 17 August 2021 (UTC)