The Philosopher Café

August 16, 2006

I.                  Book/Media Discussion – 6:00 – 6:10

o      Muzzled: From T-Ball to Terrorism, True Stories that Should Be Fiction, Smerconish, Michael, 2006

The author presents a number of true stories about people suffering from political correctness snafus and the ensuing attack from the PC police.  The contention of the author is that PC has gotten out of hand and is having dire consequences on society.

o      Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury, Ray

A chilling tale of censorship which started with political correctness.  When everyone is offended by virtually any statement, no more books are written. 

II.               Discussion: What is political correctness and what are its effects?               6:10 – 6:30 PM

• It is purpose is to shame people and tell them to be quiet.
• It is a way of controlling speech by limiting language except for the enforcers themselves.
• Trying to put a good face on a touchy subject.
• Tells us what is Ok, i.e. what the rules are.
• Consider that The Declaration of Independence is not politically correct. It offends many groups.
• An example of political correctness is affirmative action which is really just reverse discrimination, i.e. racism.
• Underlying PC is some sort of social fear but why?
• The people who push PC hate the good people with abilities, the achievers, such as the wealth builders of business because they are good.
• I am reminded of Nietzsche’s master and slave morality.  PC represents a slave morality that wants to drag down the master by manipulation and undercutting but not in a direct manner.
• It reminds me of the book 1984 by George Orwell in which language is a tool of power, used to control the people. PC does the same thing, in a way more powerful than censorship as it reshapes how we use language, which in turn shapes the way we think.
• PC seems to be based on the idea that it is for the good but this raises the questions: who’s good?, who controls it? Where is it going? Who decides who is protected and who is not?
• It reminds me on the “cool” group in high school.  They defined the standard of what was cool and everyone followed.

III.            Introduction – Theme is Philosophy and Political Correctness   6:30 – 7:00 PM

Political Correctness 

o      How far have we come?

§        No more Christmas trees or Easter holiday. 

§        What can you ask on a job interview?

§        Sexual harassment.

§        Men and women are the same, not just equal in terms of rights.

§        The lecturer’s caution. 

The Shape of Political Correctness

o      Situation is taken out of context.

o      Intention was not for public policy.

o      Meaning is ambiguous with more than one plausible interpretation.

o      Accuracy of the statement is irrelevant.

o      Negative response is from a very small minority, usually one person, who was not in the intended audience.

o      Assumption: It is Ok to punish the son for a crime committed by the father, i.e. you can discriminate against me to make up for wrongs committed by other people in an earlier time.

o      Is the PC police attack targeted at the offender or at the viewers, the public? Is it a warning to all…beware you could be next.

o      Who is the one with the problem, the one who made the snafu or the person who chose the negative interpretation?

A Judgment Passed on Values…

• Social patterns change over time and in the contemporary US, very quickly.
• As children we are taught our proper place and the way to treat others, i.e. how to project respect for others.
• Examples from my generation:
• A man never hits a woman, or a boy never hits a girl.
• A man should stand to let a lady sit.
• There is such as thing as lady like behavior and there is such as thing as course manly behavior. A man should not display the course behavior to a woman out of respect for the woman.
• Proper manners for a man include opening a car door on a date, not using foul language, and paying the restaurant tab.
• PC tells me all these values are wrong, even evil and mean the exact opposite of what I was taught.  Even assuming this is true, I am given no time to adjust, time to learn a new behavior. Rather I am judged guilty just for having had these notions in the first place. There is no court of appeal.