|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Just What is (and what is wrong with) Political Correctness? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Do you feel people don't have the right to decide how narrowly they define "likeable?" In an absolute extreme, don't people have the right to not like anyone, if they so choose? Sure, but this is not about rights.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
What's the connection to political correctness? The concern with the self-esteem of minorites is PC.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Yes, you've said that a few times. Saying it doesn't make it so, even if you say it several times.
That's what all these name changes are about, such as the switch from "negro" to "black" to "African-American." It's about the self-esteem of that group. That's PC by any common definition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I just figured you probably had more of a leg to stand on than, "people are defining what they like in ways I don't like." Admittedly, there is, I suppose, always a pressure toward conformity in any society, anywhere, anytime. But this period strikes me as particuarly moralistic and sentimental. This society needs a healthy dose of nihilism to wipe its silly smile or its solemn moral pose off its face.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
If someone takes offense at being called by a certain word, (or if the word itself is inherently derogatory,) then not calling them by it has nothing to do with self-esteem It's got everything to do with it historically.
It's just basic decency. Yes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Does robin really think that anyone who public spirited is a "Leftist"? There are different kinds of Volunteerism. There is the kind that has to do with patriotic feelings, but the kind I'm talking about is historically related to self-esteem, which is not about patriotism. Your morals and religion have a strong PC element. I guess you co-opted it. Happens all the time with these political ideas.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
So Robin now dances off to yet another topic out of the blue and once again just labels things.
Well, your idea about loving oneself, which is an important part of your belief system, came originally from the Left, so I reckon you took from there. Actually, it's so much a part of our society you didn't really have to take it from anywhere. This thread is about moral systems. It's relevant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Love GOD and love others as you love yourself. The meanings are quite different. In the Biblical context, it's taken for granted that we love ourself. However, the meaning you are talking about in your religion is PC-oriented. It has to do with LEARNING to love oneself--i.e., achieving self-esteem. The term "self-esteem" was popularized in the 60s and 70s.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
If it is taken for granted then why is it mentioned? Why is it included as a necessary part of the Second Great Commandment? It's a comparison. It's telling us in what sense we are supposed to love others. We should love them in the same sense we love ourselves--a whole lot, in other words.
You can of course show where I said that about as well as you have been able to support all your other assertions I imagine In the past you talked about people not loving themselves and having to learn how. Sounds like this concept of self-esteem to me.
And exactly what does that have to do with Jesus and the Second Great Commandment? You took this idea from the 60s and 70s concept of self-esteem.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Now stop being such a "Typical mindless categorizing kneejerk PC" (political conservative). There's a little bit more to it than that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
So pick your best cases, Faith, the ones where there is no room for doubt, where tons and tons of evidence about left-wing professorial browbeating, etc., will open our eyes. Maybe Robin sees a lot of that down in Texas--ya think? No student will ever know my political beliefs (to the extent that I have any) nor my basic philosophical beliefs. I myself consider that improper in a classroom. Most of the other teachers appear to be Democrats. The young ones, as is normal, tend to be more extreme. There's been some talk lately about "Neo-Fascists" in reference to the Government. I stay away from all this, leading my quiet life of indifference to public affairs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I wonder if you or any here have read anything in Cultural Marxism? Read any Marxist feminism? Read any Critical Theory? Most of what is loosely labelled as "literary criticism" in the last 30 years or so has a Leftist slant. Some of it is extreme. Pretentious stuff. It bores me no end.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
I've never seen anyone describe the entire works of Shakespeare to be about the suppression of women There is much of this sort of thing in the literary criticism of the last 20 years or so. The literary work is treated as a social artifact that reveals the prejudices of its day. Shakespeare's time was extremely sexist and racist, and this is revealed in his works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
Shakespeare's time was extremely sexist and racist, and this is revealed in his works. There's also a line of thought called "Queer Theory." The purpose of this type of analysis is to reveal the homophobia in any given work. Everybody has their own agenda.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
robinrohan Inactive Member |
And the idea wildly predates any formalized Queer Theory. Maybe so. I'm just saying that this field of academics is heavily oriented toward PC concerns. Edited by robinrohan, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024