In his essay here (https://theloop.ecpr.eu/untangling-description-deception-and-denunciation-a-linguistic-twist-to-the-science-of-democracy/), Rikki J. Dean states that: "[w]ords do not only describe, they also deceive and denounce".

This creates a puzzle for us. On the one hand, there are excellent reasons to trust that anyone can establish for themselves which words have some democraticity or democratness about them. They will be able to spot the fakes. On the other hand, there are arguably equally excellent reasons to say that this is not the case - that experts need to weigh in and provide advice on words and their meanings so that everyone can at least understand why x is considered "democratic" but not "y" and make up their minds from there.

What do we do in a situation where there seem to be two truths? Pursue them both at the same time? How would you solve this puzzle?

https://theloop.ecpr.eu/untangling-description-deception-and-denunciation-a-linguistic-twist-to-the-science-of-democracy/