3 ms·
Unfortunately, at this point bigot is a distinctly Orwellian term. Consider, for example, the statement "Italians are more intelligent than Germans." By itself,
by lexcorvus 11y ago
Unfortunately, at this point bigot is a distinctly Orwellian term. Consider, for example, the statement "Italians are more intelligent than Germans." By itself, this statement can't be bigoted, because it simply represents a possible fact about reality. At worst, it's false, or perhaps simply ill-posed (if, for example, one rejects the notion of quantifying intelligence). It's categorically distinct from things like "I don't like Germans because they're dumb" or "She can't be smart, she's German!" or "We don't serve Germans here." Any use of bigot that groups the first statement with the other three creates a false category, using language to attack (possible) reality for particular social and political purposes.
In the colloquial sense of not liking people simply because of their ancestry (or other such categories), I can assure you that the creator of Urbit is not a bigot. But, as with all Orwellian terms, bigot tinkers with the tools you use to think, so the word is best avoided.
- jpt4 11y ago[Disclaimer: The following is a digression into political and rhetorical philosophy. Caveat lector.] Of course, such a rigorous delineation of denotation and connotation is the mark of a decidedly literal mind, and the neoreactos do laud the socio-linguistic adriotness to see both accident and essence. Thus this appeal to pure dialectical interpretation (which I affirm as my preferable norm) of politically sensitive statements seems vulnerable to attack in ways resonant with their assault on arguments for universal human rights - the ideal which is being discussed is not the practicality which the victor hopes to influence.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]