Debate:Political correctness as a form of anti-intellectualism

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Debate.png This is a Debate page.
Feel free to add your own spin on the story. Please keep it civil!
Information icon.svg This debate was created by Blaise.


Proposition[edit]

Does anyone else on here see political correctness as a form of anti-intellectualism? It has been my experience that it teaches one to restrict their speech and their thought, and that there's a moral obligation for them to guilt others into doing the same. I believe that the free flow of information and new ideas requires that people be able to speak their minds, and that a good way for people to learn and expand their world view is to sometimes hear new information and viewpoints they don't initially agree with. I'm worried that the more people are told to shut up under the guise of "That is offensive", the fewer critical thinkers we'll have in society.

I believe that people who abuse the word "we" should be stood up against a wall and shot.--MonarchofascistBulgarian M36 Helmet side view.jpgС нами Бог! 15:12, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

This is a fear that only people with privilege really have imo. Most of the time I've seen "politically correct" used as a snarl word, it tends to come from right-wing bigots who hate it when people call them out on their obvious bigotry or conflate being frank or "real" with being a raving racist/sexist/homophobe/xenophobe/etc. BlackProg

There's a few kinds of anti-political correctness advocates: 1. People who just like to be offensive because they're assholes (not intellectual). 2. People who use politically incorrect speech in comedy or humor and don't like being restricted (not intellectual, but not really malevolent either). 3. People who recognize that excessive use of dogmatic dismissals of thought or ideas which may otherwise be offensive can be limiting to scientific, social science, or HFA knowledge (examples: sure, I hate Hitler, but I want to read Mein Kampf in an uncensored form for historical knowledge - ok, there's a fair deal of evidence that some people are inherently gay, but are there some who have also been conditioned that way? - yes, the character in my story is a racist, sorry if that offends you, but I don't feel the need to explain myself to you - are women biologically prone to what otherwise might be termed as "gold-digging" behavior due to the fact that we see male acquisition and gifting of resources to females in multiple species and nearly never vice-versa? - etc.) JRCHReason (talk) 05:01, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

You don't like that I used a contraction, or that I used the term "we" to refer to people in our society?--User:Blaise

Any tool that can be used to limit language is a vector for anti-intellectualism, but let's be honest, the amount of actual intellectual value derived from most political incorrectness is zilch. And keep in mind, that no one forces political correctness on you. It's a way of being polite. You don't come into a college classroom and expect to have a meaningful discussion by disrespecting each other. That fosters an atmosphere of anti-intellectualism much faster. Ikanreed (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Is it possible to be equally opposed to Political Correctness and Political Incorrectness? I believe in freedom of speech, but I also think that one has the right to criticize another's speech as long as the former doesn't shut the latter down. 216.162.93.54 (talk) 13:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

I believe that wingnuts who complain about progressives and their PC strains are wrong. But there are strands of progressives that focus so much on identity politics, they don't address the economic/environmental side of things at all. Like does it matter if gays can marry if they go broke and starve to death before they manage to? So yes, one can be equally opposed to both.— Unsigned, by: 216.162.93.54 / talk / contribs

wait a moment. there is a fallacy here that needs to be settled for any meaningful debate to happen at all, namely, what is Political Correctness? if by political correctness we mean not using raciest imagery and the like, then no, political correctness is a way to avoid normalizing racism, sexism, and other forms of prejudice. if it means somthing else, that issue would need to be settled on its own merits. 96.37.80.50 (talk) 19:15, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

As with Health and Safety 'political correctness' is used in several different contexts.

There is what might be described as the 'courtesy angle'/seeing 'persons in category X' as 'persons (otherwise like the rest of us) who happen to be X' rather than 'X persons' and similar; there is the euphemism treadmill and variants; those who think back fondly to the social climate of their youth, and those who wish to shock/startle or who become 'official right wing old buffers and similar' (who are allowed to 'say what everybody occasionally thinks' - Dennis Thatcher, Prince Phillip and others). Then there are those who #feel threatened# in some manner by the current situation and/or who use the phrase 'PC gone mad'/'snarlword-PCism'. And then there are the 'newspaper headline and clickbait writers.' Anna Livia (talk) 10:04, 19 August 2017 (UTC)