Treating Other People With Respect

sir drinks-a-lot said:
Not sure what either of these mean, but would love to hear if you think you can have a meaningful discussion with a dogmatic creationist who thinks the Earth is 5000 years old.
Click to expand...

I suspect you could with some of them.
 
Upchurch said:
1) yes, but it does take great patience.
Click to expand...

Really. How would you go about it an why do you think it would take great patience?


2) the "Rule of So" isn't actually any sort of rule.
Click to expand...

I see is as more of a guideline than a rule. I've never heard of it except for one here. My understanding of it would be that when a post is of the form "So, blah blah blah?", the poster is trying hard to misunderstand and misinterpret what they've just quoted. Looking above, mijopaalmc's post certainly follows the Rule of So!
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
When a phrase is so all-encompassing that it means means so many different things to so many different people, it really doesn't mean anything. And it really doesn't mean what you listed above either. As a pejorative, it is labeling those you oppose doing the listed actions.
Click to expand...

Like rape culture or white privilege, it's not a specific single thing but a critique of a group of (arguably) related things.
 
ThunderChunky said:
Like rape culture or white privilege, it's not a specific single thing but a critique of a group of (arguably) related things.
Click to expand...

Not really. Certainly not like political correctness, which is applied to a very broad number of topics including, but not limited to racism, sexism, misogyny, LGBT issues, evolution, climate change, military actions, and even abortion
 
This thread is the perfect PC example.
When trying to discuss the rules, the PC crowd objects on semantics issues, and ventures off assigning their own definitions to words that everyone understands in common usage, all the while refusing to let the non-PC in on the definition.
Then he builds strawmen out of comments using any kind of analogy.

(To be fair, there are those who will dismiss any alternate usage as "PC". You can't have a meaningful discussion with them, either)
 
Upchurch said:
More like, some people find being courteous to the wrong kind of people highly offensive.
Click to expand...
I confess to being profoundly disturbed by the idea of "the wrong kind of people" in any context. There are just people. Wrong kind, right kind, they all deserve a baseline level of respect courtesy.

Darth Rotor said:
Nice troll, arth, long may it live.

*two thumbs up* :D
Click to expand...
I think there's been some good, worthwhile and interesting discussion here.
 
rwguinn said:
This thread is the perfect PC example.
When trying to discuss the rules, the PC crowd objects on semantics issues, and ventures off assigning their own definitions to words that everyone understands in common usage, all the while refusing to let the non-PC in on the definition.
Then he builds strawmen out of comments using any kind of analogy.
Click to expand...

Am I the PC crowd?

As for semantic issues, is this your first thread on this board? It's hardly unique, especially when the topic of the thread has to do with the semantics of a term.
 
rwguinn said:
This thread is the perfect PC example.
When trying to discuss the rules, the PC crowd objects on semantics issues, and ventures off assigning their own definitions to words that everyone understands in common usage, all the while refusing to let the non-PC in on the definition.
Then he builds strawmen out of comments using any kind of analogy.

(To be fair, there are those who will dismiss any alternate usage as "PC". You can't have a meaningful discussion with them, either)
Click to expand...

If you can't provide a clear and consistent definition of a term, discussing its instance becomes impossible.

You want to discuss substituting "vertically challenged" for "short"? You might have a point that merely substituting the phrase for the word doesn't remove the stigma from being short.

You want to discuss how referring to a group of children as "boys and girls" might be non inclusive of non gender binary people? You might want to consider how society erases the experience of people who do not fit into the gender binary.

However, until you can come up with a reasonable definition of "political correctness" that includes most--if not all--of the objections raised against political correctness, you just have a bunch of special pleadings for things that you don't like in the political discourse. This is not a trivial semantic issue of dueling definitions; rather, it is a basic definitional issue that needs to be settled before it is even possible to discuss political correctness.
 
mijopaalmc said:
Except that rape culture and white privilege actually exist.
Click to expand...

Not really, no. The terms are critiques of the culture, not actual things that exist. Likewise, political correctness is a critique of the culture, not an actual thing that exists. You might agree with one critique and disagree with another, but that doesn't mean one exists and the the other does not.

Upchurch said:
Not really. Certainly not like political correctness, which is applied to a very broad number of topics including, but not limited to racism, sexism, misogyny, LGBT issues, evolution, climate change, military actions, and even abortion
Click to expand...

It's a perfect comparison actually. Rape culture is applied to a million different things too, but it is argued that all those things share a commonality which justifies the label. Same thing with political correctness. It doesn't mean all uses of the term are correct or actually share that core common feature (or even that it is real), but that is the argument behind the term.
 
mijopaalmc said:
If you can't provide a clear and consistent definition of a term, discussing its instance becomes impossible.

You want to discuss substituting "vertically challenged" for "short"? You might have a point that merely substituting the phrase for the word doesn't remove the stigma from being short.

You want to discuss how referring to a group of children as "boys and girls" might be non inclusive of non gender binary people? You might want to consider how society erases the experience of people who do not fit into the gender binary.

However, until you can come up with a reasonable definition of "political correctness" that includes most--if not all--of the objections raised against political correctness, you just have a bunch of special pleadings for things that you don't like in the political discourse. This is not a trivial semantic issue of dueling definitions; rather, it is a basic definitional issue that needs to be settled before it is even possible to discuss political correctness.
Click to expand...
Lets discuss Illegal Immigration
2 words- one means "against the Law", the other "moving from one country into another"
Simple?
"You racist bastard." "You hate Mexicans" "You mean 'undocumented' residents"
No further discussion possible there...
Or perhaps a discussion of educationally mainstreaming children whose intellectual development is retarded would generate less hatred?
It is to laugh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom