I would call it a definition, not a side. I agree that definitions of ambiguous/​loaded terms must be explicated before use. I disagree that this is taking sides.
Definitions and word choice are a form of framing. Framing and other meta-discussion is a powerful tool for shaping the object-level discussion.
I am fairly suspicious of claims that framing attempts are neutral and apolitical.
Of course, this is complicated by the fact that good definitions that reflect underlying reality are useful. But both modifying those definitions to be overly broad or overly narrow, and trying to prevent that modification, can be a subtle form of taking sides.
I would call it a definition, not a side. I agree that definitions of ambiguous/​loaded terms must be explicated before use. I disagree that this is taking sides.
Definitions and word choice are a form of framing. Framing and other meta-discussion is a powerful tool for shaping the object-level discussion.
I am fairly suspicious of claims that framing attempts are neutral and apolitical.
Of course, this is complicated by the fact that good definitions that reflect underlying reality are useful. But both modifying those definitions to be overly broad or overly narrow, and trying to prevent that modification, can be a subtle form of taking sides.