Post by Gabby on Sept 7, 2010 11:07:03 GMT
Courtesy is one thing. The phrase "political correctness" comes out of Soviet Russia , and refers to conforming to the prevailing political ideology on pain of being "re-educated". Orwellian, indeed.
Ah, but language is fluid. Nowadays, it's mostly used by bigots that complain they can't call people Pakis and Negros anymore.
However, your comments indicate a degree of political unreliability. Please report to processing station 105 for political re-education.
The problem as I see it with restricting speech is that thought is also restricted. We must be free to think the unthinkable, if only so as to prevent it from coming to pass. “If free speech is outlawed, only outlaws will be able to speak freely.” Likewise for thought.
I don't think political correctness as it understood today is a legal matter. Only dipstick nations like the UK ban hate speech. It's just a social pressure, which is perfectly OK. If bigots get criticised for calling homosexuals faggots, then they will moderate their language, if not their views. The second could then bring about the first, with any luck, and if it doesn't, at least we don't have to listen to their bile.
[QUOTE
Also: Those who talk about souls tend to state that all human beings possess them. Some human beings do not desire not to be “tossers”. So, unless you're going to argue the “springs from”…
[/QUOTE]
I use soul in a far less metaphysical sense, just to mean some sense of decency. If someones wants to be a tosser, I take it as a given they are one.
Well, yes; we are debating it, are we not?
Indeed. The quote is often used as a counter-point to moral absolutists, but it suggests a massive amount of relativity, which is dangerous.
In fact, I don't think it holds true. A freedom fighter does not attack civilian targets. No freedom worth having comes from attacking civilians, not to mention the tactical idiocy of attacking those you seek to liberate, and those who could support you.
