well, the response has missed the point. — StreetlightX
The responses "misses the point" only if the person agrees with you in regard to your last points - — BitconnectCarlos
When for instance, someone points out that Israel is an apartheid state that regularly murders Palestinians and steals their land, or that Donald Rumsfeld is an architect of mass murder, and the response is: "why can't you be civil about these things?", — StreetlightX
Not cherrypicking, but wanted to follow up on this. I’ve never heard anyone respond with a demand for civility or niceness to those points, usually its an uncivil response in return.
Who says that? — DingoJones
How so? A disagreement would normally occasion an attempt to refute the claim. Whether or not you agree or disagree is irrelevant to, well, the irrelevancy of tone policing. — StreetlightX
Whether or not you agree or disagree is irrelevant to, well, the irrelevancy of tone policing. — StreetlightX
But, if you'd rather not waste time, then thanks for your posts they have been wonderful — StreetlightX
What do you mean by natural selection? — DingoJones
I would stop you at the word "apartheid" and we would begin a detail comparison of both the apartheid system in South Africa and the current state of racial affairs in Israel. — BitconnectCarlos
Some highlights:
[*] "Civility discourse enforces a false equation between incivility and violence that works to mask everyday violence as a civic norm. The violence that is polite is thrice as damaging as the direct attack because it gaslights as it wounds".
[*] "Calls for civility seek to evade our calls for change. The accusation of incivility is a technique of depoliticization aimed at undoing collectivity... When they tell us to be more civil, we need to go bigger, ask for more, come back harder".
[*] "Civility is a political aesthetic that obscures its politicity by asserting that it is “only” an aesthetic or a style. It is thus an aesthetic that is served by the assertion that aesthetics and politics are separate realms". — StreetlightX
If "incivility is anger directed at unjust civil ordering" it's difficult to object to incivility, and urge civility, isn't it? On the other hand, if it's merely rudeness, offensiveness or insolence (as "incivility" is typically defined) then the "Eleven Theses" don't seem so compelling. — Ciceronianus the White
However, civility towards others should be the basis of most people's politics, the recognition that it's guaranteed that people don't think the same should lead people to the conclusion that treating people who think differently from you rudely can only lead to its prevalence in discourse. Rudeness towards others fosters tribalism, close-mindedness, ignorance and activates nearly every psychological barrier to listening to or understanding others. Incivility towards structures needs to be earned and incivility towards people needs to be earned. But again I don't get to dictate for others, when it is or isn't earned. — Judaka
That is, civility isn't some 'neutral' position that merely concerns 'style' while the substance of political argument is elsewhere. Rather, the demand for civility is political from the get-go: it says, only these claims are worth entertaining, while these others are not. Couple this with the fact that 'civility' is always the privilege of those who are not affected by issues - or at least are comfortable with them - it basically puts the ball in their court and keeps it there. — StreetlightX
the war criminality of Donald Rumsfeld and most of America's political leadership) — StreetlightX
"liberals individuate; radicals collectivize" — StreetlightX
The historical connection between the rules of "civil discourse" and the maintenance of structures of power seems clear to me. The English language remains a particularly striking example of this. But non-adherence to the rules of civility as established by the privileged is indeed frequently used as a method to minimise the influence of the marginalized. — Echarmion
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.