↪Pattern-chaser
"Politeness or violence is the choice we're faced with. I choose politeness. Violence achieves nothing worthwhile."
Rudeness and violence are not the same thing, nor are politeness and violence each other's opposites. — Ilya B Shambat
↪Fooloso4 But Trump is lying to his audience. There's nothing more to it than that. I'm not happy about it, but what he's doing is not complicated or mysterious. :chin:
And I can see no connection between what Trump is doing and 'political correctness', except that he mentions it. He mentions lots of other things too, and he lies about them too. I think the lying is the problem? — Pattern-chaser
Political correctness, an often-ambiguous phrase, has in recent months become a hallmark of Republican rhetoric against Democrats. Those on the right have asserted that the First Amendment rights of Americans are slowly eroding. Those on the left have responded that our diversifying society is simply becoming more tolerant and accepting. Yet the American understanding of the phrase has been slowly changing since its inception, transforming from a descriptive phrase to one associated with polarization and partisanship. Examples of such change can be found today in the daily news cycle and embedded in our nation’s history.
...
A shift in PC rhetoric occurred in the 1960s, a period of intense social change in America. Historian Ruth Perry reminds us in her 1992 article Historically Correct that during the early days of modern “political correctness” both sides of the aisle were active participants. “Each side felt that the other side was standing in the way of liberation,” she observed. Phrases like “civil rights”, “Black power” and “feminist” became popular among liberals, while the House Un-American Activities Committee served as a bastion of anti-communist conservatism. Each side felt being politically correct was beneficial to society. Neither side “owned” the term, and it was for a time helpful and accepted to be politically correct.
In that time, political correctness encompassed not only words, but also actions. Republicans believed the anti-war protests during the late ’60s to be “politically incorrect” and Democrats considered support for civil rights legislation to be “politically correct.” In later years, according to Perry, the phrase quickly became a double-edged sword. The late 1990s saw another shift in the phrase and it was soon “used every which way—straight, ironically, satirically, interrogatively.” Political correctness was no longer a compliment, but a term laced with partisan feeling, owned by the left and despised by the right.
Today, “political correctness” is a term best associated with choice of words. In an interview with the HPR, Sanford J. Ungar, former host of NPR’s All Things Considered and former Washington editor of The Atlantic, posited that modern use of the phrase “comes from a reluctance or discouragement of people from saying something terribly unpopular”. Discerning both parties’ stances on the issue requires a mere look at their ideologies. Conservatism, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is a tendency or disposition “to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions,” including, but not limited to the American vernacular. Conversely, liberalism is a “belief in the value of social and political change in order to achieve progress.” It therefore makes sense that those with liberal ideologies continue to institute new rules of language and speech.
A Political Battle
Today, some Republicans claim that the historically dual-ownership of “political correctness” has all but eroded. In the first Republican presidential debate on August 6, when asked about his history of controversial comments regarding women, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump sternly responded, “I frankly don’t have time for political correctness.” Earlier this month, in an interview on Meet the Press, Dr. Ben Carson was questioned by both sides of the aisle for his claim that he would not “advocate that we put a Muslim in charge of this nation.” In a later campaign speech, responding to a question about anti-Muslim sentiments he retorted, “The only way we fix that is by fixing the PC culture in our country, which only listens to one narrative. And if it doesn’t fit their philosophy then they have to try to ascribe some motive to it to make it fit.” Shifting the media firestorm from oneself and onto a liberal “they” has been a prominent strategy for Carson and Trump throughout the campaign.
While the reasons for Trump and Carson’s success are numerous, it is clear that their rhetoric attracts many conservative voters. According to a September 24 national Quinnipiac poll of likely GOP voters Trump and Carson, in first and second place respectively, claim 42 percent of the party’s electorate, in a 15-person field. Focusing on Trump and Carson’s interpretation of “political correctness” as an insult, Ungar said, “I’m suspicious of the loose use, the reckless use, of the term to tar anybody you disagree with or that you are challenging.” However, Ungar makes a distinction: perhaps the shift in rhetoric is a sign of changing feelings towards the phrase. “It’s become very fashionable … for people to take the term and to use it as a mocking term, to use it as a way to discredit anybody who expresses concern about an underdog in anything.” This alteration in the use of phrase may be indicative of a polarization of the political process.
...
History has proven that the term “political correctness” is not set in stone. Its meaning has changed dramatically from its first use. Shifting attitudes in the political arena show that perhaps the phrase and what it stands for are changing once again. “People are understanding more and more, how dangerous it is to suppress opinions or to make some opinions unacceptable,” says Ungar. As the race for president continues, one could expect to see more backlash against the PC culture from the likes of Trump and Carson. What’s clear is that this isn’t the end of “political correctness”—it’s just the end of the term as we once knew it.
Why are you continuing to argue? — Fooloso4
Yes, there are distinctions between correctness and political correctness. — Fooloso4
That's what we do here. It's a philosophy forum. — S
I'm glad you acknowledge that. My concern was that you were confusing the two, given that the subject was the latter, and you switched to the former for no apparent reason. — S
That may be what you do here, but philosophical argument is a means not an end. — Fooloso4
The confusion is all yours. — Fooloso4
Political correctness is a type of correctness. — Fooloso4
Or at least it was until it became code for incorrectness. — Fooloso4
Which is to say incorrect by virtue of their politics. — Fooloso4
In either case, it is about being correct in matters political. — Fooloso4
you unexpectedly and irrationally changed the subject without good reason. — S
Yes, but that's irrelevant. A type of correctness is still not the same thing as correctness — S
Using it as code is still missing the main topic, which is about political correctness proper. — S
We are not doing what you accuse Trump and conservatives of doing. — S
In order to actually respect or tolerate the next person I need to understand their perspective. — Ilya B Shambat
But it's not as simple as that. I'm not incorrect about something just because I'm "politically incorrect" about something — S
The cheerleaders for "political correctness" are not correct in a broader and more meaningful sense by default, and making that assumption is to not think about the topic philosophically. — S
It is evident that you misunderstood me. Go back and figure it out. — Fooloso4
Of course its relevant. — Fooloso4
It's relevant to the meaning of the term political correctness. Do you think the distinction between correctness and something of that type is what any of this is about? — Fooloso4
There is no political correctness "proper". — Fooloso4
"We" who? — Fooloso4
What are you going on about? Of course you are not incorrect because someone considers what you say incorrect or politically incorrect. — Fooloso4
Do you feel better having bashed that straw man? Yes, just because someone's position has "correct" in its title does not mean that it is correct. This is something you think is only obvious when one thinks philosophically? Is this epiphany a result of your thinking philosophically? — Fooloso4
No, a point about correctness broadly speaking is not relevant to a point about a very specific sort of correctness. — S
But political correctness isn't necessarily correct, and that's the obvious and important distinction which you tried and failed to gloss over in your original reply. — S
Correctness is necessarily correct, otherwise it wouldn't be correctness. — S
I have a talent for spotting logical errors. — S
No, talking about the meaning of correctness in general is a pointless digression. — S
I made a point about the distinction between political correctness and being right. Why is it so hard for you to admit that you missed the point, when it's so obvious that that's what you did? — S
Sure, and there's no horse "proper" either. — S
You must have a short attention span or something. Myself and others in this discussion. — S
It's not my fault that you have difficulty remaining on point. — S
We simply ought to use different words to describe what actually we are talking about.When someone says "political correctness" they may mean a variety of different things. No one of these uses is the "proper" usage. — Fooloso4
If you're not Defender of The Faith, then why do you come across that way? — S
You have been a contrarian to almost every critical thing that I have said of political correctness, as though you are trying to protect it, like an apologist. — S
It is merely complaining about how some people are abusing a term, rather than about political correctness proper. — S
You mean the whole debate is so irrelevant, not much to even discuss it or what?] — ssu
But has 'the Left' really embraced political correctness? If you go past the stereotypical portrayal of cultural marxists against the alt-right, does this really fall into the left/right divide? — ssh
Truly a red herring as those being critical of PC usually don't have any ideas like that in mind. It is truly a tiny cabal that march with tiki-torches and yell "Jews will not replace us". — ssu
With regard to your claim that all women are cats and all men are dogs, I beg to differ. Noah Te Stroete and I are both men, yet I am a cool cat, and he is a pussy. And his mum is a bitch. — S
That there is some ambiguity does not mean that the meaning is whatever someone wants it to be — S
I similarly made fun of your naivety by taking it to where it logically leads: horses that purr. — S
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.