41–50 of 429 posts
What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?
It affects your perception, optimizing production costs is easier to do and less morally problematic than firing people.
...which is a soft way to say "wrong" or "evil"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He would have had a field day if he was alive. It is a loss for all of us that he is gone. Still, we now have Chapelle, who is building similiar legacy and potentially Bill Burr one day. Absolute agreement on the philosopher/jester vibes.
They're not even in the same sport, let alone the same league.
1. initially safe,sanitized corporate friendly jokes 2. some commercial success 3. ? 4. jokes increasingly become a social commentary and are less and less 'friendly'
My favourite one in Dutch: People with a disability used to be called "handicapped". At some point, that was no longer acceptable. The correct term to use became "invalid". So it was better to say "that person is invalid" than "that person is handicapped".
Another example Carlin provides is "cripple". It can be used as both an adjective and as a verb and concisely describes the situation. It's entirely neutral and free of euphemism. He also makes a similar argument for "retarded".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's funny we went the opposite way in France, "invalid" in the past, now "handicapped".
I have heard the term "differently abled" kicked around, which completely buries the actual issue. As a "differently abled" person, I will say I don't need to go hiding my handicap, I'd much rather someone figure out to help me adapt better or just fix it, rather than hiding it. I know I have a problem, I have it all day every day. Why are people who don't have my problems so concerned about just saying it out loud?
The online disabled community has been completely poisoned by it sadly.
What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?
Terrorist or freedom fighter?
Uncomfortable truth or hate speech?
etc.
One does not re-translate what is said to one, into some universal, neutral idea.
So, you then have to wonder, are your thoughts actually your own? Are they based on what you yourself have perceived or on what has been provided to you? And who is it that is doing the provisioning? Have they got your best interests at heart? Do you have other people's best interests at heart when you say things to them? Do you only speak truth, or do you echo provided opinions? Etc.
Quite surprising the read:
> Who cares?
Surely everyone cares about having a valid understanding of reality?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they resonate well, it either means the population as whole thinks it is accurate or that the population as a wholr is wrong. Either is possible, but I think you are wrong about Carlin being wrong. Language defines the quality of our conversations. If we can't be honest with it, some nuance will be lost.
There are many things in the middle of the false dichotomy you’ve presented. Such as “people don’t really think about it deeply and it sounds superficially good so they like it” or “people laugh because he’s a comedian but don’t take it seriously because of same.”
It may help to think of it as a range.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Deflection, (self)censorship, there's a number of reasons. Toilet paper became bathroom tissue because some people think toilets are gross. Shellshock became battle fatigue so that people aren't discouraged from going to war; "they're just tired". It became post-traumatic stress disorder to make it both clinical, and to put it on the person having it - YOU have a disorder after a traumatic event. Modern day example,…
I understand the reasons (i.e. toilets probably evoke more subtle grossness than bathrooms or washrooms do), and I haven’t heard some of those you mention, but still unclear why it’s a bad thing vis a vis an observation of changing language.
All these people trying to make their language more soft and welcoming are ignoring the fact that the world is supposed to suck, kindness is a modern invention, and frankly we can all see that it was a mistake.
I recommend you curse at everyone around constantly to make them harder and stronger, they'll certainly thank you for your service eventually, once they too are strong like you.
George Carlin should be studied, translated and dubbed in every possible language.
In my opinion, George Carlin sometimes had some kernel of good observation at the heart of his bits, that he made worse and less correct the more he pontificated on it. And a lot of his observations are the kind of "common sense" folk wisdom that falls apart on closer inspection.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The better stand-up comedians are hard to distinguish from philosophers. Carlin is right up there. It's a pity he's gone, we kind of need him right now.
Carlin has only ever been a "philosopher" to juveniles. He was right on corporate America and the American war machine, but he was a self-loathing misanthrope and nihilist
What’s the effect here? I don’t think I like soft language, but can’t really pinpoint why I don’t like it. Is it bad that some company came up with toilet paper and now it’s bathroom tissue? Shell shock is now PTSD? Who cares?
A common theme with a lot of Carlin rants - they resonate well, but they're completely wrong. I don't think we want to describe sexual assault victims as having "shell shock". Even a soldier could get "shell shock" without encountering any shells. The language got softer not because we're all a bunch of softies but because we noticed a general pattern and generalized the name to match.
I agree "shell shock" wouldn't suffice but you could just change his word to "past-shock" or something, and notice how different that feels than an 8-syllable medical phrase.
I do think putting big fancy words on things implies a fake level of understanding, takes the word away from everyday users, and has other real effects.