Monday, December 13, 2004
Political correctness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Political correctness - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A comment made by LR in a conversation with him renewed a question I have on occasion wondered at, relating to the meaning and interpretation of the idea of political correctness. LR, discussing the state of Iraq's current affairs, made reference to the "insurgents" who combat the occupational government. He then promptly corrected himself to note that he prefers to refer to such people as guerillas, for, to do otherwise (if I recall his reasoning adequately) implies a small or unorganized collection of combatants.
I considered that this is an example of something resembling the application of /political correctness/ by a member of the right, and one of several by the same--quite linguistically conscious--person; it is not? The element of /rectitude/ (as in the word correctness) is present, in applying a norm against the usage made in practice. And the element of /politics/ (as in the word political) is present, in consideration of whether the word choice promotes the flow of power in the right way.
In reviews of the term (political correctness), though, an additional element or two come in, and may even be central, for all that I know. Namely: Does the word choice promote inclusiveness of the object of the word within society, or does it, on the other hand, offend and marginalize?
It's not my intention to prescribe a new meaning of political correctness so as to be more palatable to members of the social/political right-wing. But perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.
Perhaps I am subconcsiously wishing for a demarcation of the term, though, as a more precisely defined thing, looking at which we can understand good and bad usages of it in practice.
To introduce a clunky term just for the moment, let's speak of /statist correctness/ as a condition whereby certain words are proscribed either with the use of coercion or for the benefit of the ruling class (as such) or both. To introduce a separate term such as this might have an advantage over identifying this idea with the other ideas contained in the term political correctness.
What other ideas? For one thing, what I gather is known as the Sapir-Wharf Hypothesis, which seems to state that the words a person uses influence his thought and behavior. I believe this to be true (assuming perhaps presumptuously that I have a grasp of the basics of the hypothesis (or of the idea?)). If taken as true, it means we must-ought to be vigilant against using words in ways conducive of undesired thought and behavior.
I think this blog entry is getting off-track and possibly silly. I write too much for my reading. Enough said.
*References:*
[Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-Whorf_hypothesis ]
"The Origin and Nature of Political Correctness". http://www.users.bigpond.com/smartboard/pc.htm ]
Link
A comment made by LR in a conversation with him renewed a question I have on occasion wondered at, relating to the meaning and interpretation of the idea of political correctness. LR, discussing the state of Iraq's current affairs, made reference to the "insurgents" who combat the occupational government. He then promptly corrected himself to note that he prefers to refer to such people as guerillas, for, to do otherwise (if I recall his reasoning adequately) implies a small or unorganized collection of combatants.
I considered that this is an example of something resembling the application of /political correctness/ by a member of the right, and one of several by the same--quite linguistically conscious--person; it is not? The element of /rectitude/ (as in the word correctness) is present, in applying a norm against the usage made in practice. And the element of /politics/ (as in the word political) is present, in consideration of whether the word choice promotes the flow of power in the right way.
In reviews of the term (political correctness), though, an additional element or two come in, and may even be central, for all that I know. Namely: Does the word choice promote inclusiveness of the object of the word within society, or does it, on the other hand, offend and marginalize?
It's not my intention to prescribe a new meaning of political correctness so as to be more palatable to members of the social/political right-wing. But perhaps I'm getting ahead of myself.
Perhaps I am subconcsiously wishing for a demarcation of the term, though, as a more precisely defined thing, looking at which we can understand good and bad usages of it in practice.
To introduce a clunky term just for the moment, let's speak of /statist correctness/ as a condition whereby certain words are proscribed either with the use of coercion or for the benefit of the ruling class (as such) or both. To introduce a separate term such as this might have an advantage over identifying this idea with the other ideas contained in the term political correctness.
What other ideas? For one thing, what I gather is known as the Sapir-Wharf Hypothesis, which seems to state that the words a person uses influence his thought and behavior. I believe this to be true (assuming perhaps presumptuously that I have a grasp of the basics of the hypothesis (or of the idea?)). If taken as true, it means we must-ought to be vigilant against using words in ways conducive of undesired thought and behavior.
I think this blog entry is getting off-track and possibly silly. I write too much for my reading. Enough said.
*References:*
[Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sapir-Whorf_hypothesis ]
"The Origin and Nature of Political Correctness". http://www.users.bigpond.com/smartboard/pc.htm ]
Comments:
Post a Comment
