Live data from Hacker News

George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

thoughtco.com

161–170 of 429 posts

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#161
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vegan argument is so silly as if meat industry just spun up overnight and only reason people consume delicious and nutritious animal products is because they can but them in sanitized packaging. I hope you also aren’t buying consumer electronics because then you are literally putting animals ahead of humans. Or is that too inconvenient for you and you actually like the cognitive dissonance after all

I'm puzzled why people are so triggered by the vegan thing. That's not the point. Or maybe it is, maybe the meat eaters culture war is based on the idea of the virtue of eating meat and they get very angry when someone points out that actual animals are being killed, like cut with a knife then let to bleed out then seperated into pieces and shipped to the consumers in a package that doesn't look like an animal that w…

> when someone points out that actual animals are being killed, like cut with a knife then let to bleed out then seperated into pieces and shipped to the consumers in a package that doesn't look like an animal that was minding its own business a few days ago?

The argument is entirely emotional. Another person can say "I like killing animals for their meat because eating animal meat makes me feel good" and it will be equally valid, because neither are any valid, both arguments are entirely subjective. In fact all the people in all of history were pretty much enjoying killing other living beings with sharp tools, then let them to bleed out, then dice, slice, heat and eat them. Someone can even go on to say "I like the industrial cruel killing methods technological society employs because they allow me to eat meat for cheaper." It is equally valid as saying "Oh poor animals don't kill them!"

I personally believe in Islam and thus believe animals are specifically created for humankind to benefit, thus it's both moral and fulfilling a purpose to kill and eat them. My faith also says that an animal must be killed in the traditional least-cruel way by a human, for it to be halal (permissible) to be eaten.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Car crash -> automobile accident --- a softening, though he's getting some mileage out of switching "car" to "automobile" (I can hear his voice very clearly in my head dancing over the syllables in "auto-mo-beeel") and the real language is "car accident". They're very rarely if ever "accidents"

Webster's: 1a: an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance Their meeting was an accident. 1b: lack of intention or necessity : chance They met by accident rather than by design. 2a: an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance Car accidents match one or all of these definitions.

With proper road design, traffic fatalities can be reduced to a negligible rate. Oslo famously achieved zero per year. Since roads can be designed with this degree of safety, it follows that high rates of fatalities are a result of poor road design, and hence not unforeseeable accidents.

"Accident" is actually softening language -- it diminishes the agency of the driver, and the designer of the road. "Traffic collision" describes what happened, and does not presume that nobody is to blame.

The "car" part of "car accident" is also softening: nobody is "hit by a car", they are hit by a motorist.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal “proof”: In the heart of Manhattan’s ultra trendy Chelsea neighborhood is the Chelsea market which is now this super trendy food hall. In the basement is a delicious butcher named Dicksons where literally hundreds of New Yorkers and tourists eat and drink craft beers while they literally saw entire pigs and baby calfs in half and dangle their carcasses in clear eye sight of where you sit and eat. I take my…

Go show your kid a real factory farm instead of a high-end butcher in a trendy food hall and report back! Easy experiment to run and your kids’ reaction could settle this debate.

Of course seeing something you haven’t seen is shocking. To make someone give up meat is a stretch. My kids have been up close and personal to butchers in wet markets chopping up fish, pigs and chickens in Taiwan. This is the daily way of life for billions of people. I believe people over estimate the reaction this would garner from most of the world’s population, which indicates to me that a similar reaction would happen here if we saw it regularly.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#164

Just for fun, from the first example: * Toilet paper -> bathroom tissue --- sure, a softening of the language. * Sneakers -> running shoes --- not a softening; sneakers aren't the same as running shoes, and "sneaker" was a regionalism (it's "gym shoe" where I grew up). * False teeth -> dental appliance --- a softening, though a welcome one in this case. * Medicine -> medication --- a softening (a nominalization of a…

>* Medicine -> medication --- a softening (a nominalization of a denominalization, at that!). Down with medication!

I think the extra layer adds a shade of meaning here. Medication is something you take because a health professional wants to medicate you with it. Medicine is just anything that might make you better. That's why we still talk about "natural medicine" or "alternative medicine" rather than "alternative medication".

So in semantic terms this is actually an instance of strengthening. All medication is medicine but not necessarily vice versa. It probably just reflects the overall uptick in people taking pills prescribed by their doctors rather than Daffy's Elixir.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it relevant whether one can put a finger on the difference? The claim was that people use their economic distance from meat production to protect themselves from the negative feelings that would be created if they had to do it themselves, especially in the manner of factory farming. Anyway my theory for the distinction is 1) the scale of suffering is obviously far far greater than family-scale slaughter and 2)…

> Why is it relevant whether one can put a finger on the difference? You brought this up, not me. > 1) the scale of suffering is obviously far far greater than family-scale slaughter Not if every family has to slaughter their own meat, the scale is the same just distributed so you don't see it. > 2) the way in which we do factory farming reflects poorly on us as a species This isn't inherent to factory farming though…

No, I pointed out the difference, which is obviously real. The reason for the difference is irrelevant.

Uhhh no, the scale certainly wouldn’t be the same. An average American eats more than a hundred animals per year. You can’t seriously think people would be consuming at that rate, or could even afford to consume at that rate, without factory farming.

> some families [abuse their animals]… people wouldn’t feel any different

We literally put people in jail for abusing their animals, so yes, they actually do feel differently about it.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#166
post #100

I saw a conversation on Twitter a while ago back when it still was Twitter. The OP with many followers was laying out words and classes of words with negative connotations that shouldn't be used. Someone replied in good faith to OP and asked how we should express negative thoughts. OPs answer was basically that we shouldn't. I find that kind of thought very off putting and minorly disturbing. An important part of the…

[deleted]

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does human welfare matter if at the end we all eventually die?

It doesn't. Who said so? Your gut feelings? Human intuition? Nothing temporary ever matters. Human life can only matter if there's something permanent about it. If there isn't, nothing ever matters. None. Nil. Yes, I'm talking about religion. That pesky thing which folks on HN tend to look down in disgust. The idea of accountability with permanent, eternal consequences. Acts carrying on to another life which won't ev…

> Nothing temporary ever matters. Human life can only matter if there's something permanent about it. If there isn't, nothing ever matters. None. Nil.

Who said so? Your gut feelings?

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#168
post #100

I saw a conversation on Twitter a while ago back when it still was Twitter. The OP with many followers was laying out words and classes of words with negative connotations that shouldn't be used. Someone replied in good faith to OP and asked how we should express negative thoughts. OPs answer was basically that we shouldn't. I find that kind of thought very off putting and minorly disturbing. An important part of the…

Something I was rather ignorant to for the longest time was how fascism can exist at both ends of the spectrum. My last day on Mastodon was the day a few people ganged up on me quite aggressively for not putting Alt text in an image. Tolerance isn’t acceptance. It’s letting things you don’t like exist without making a big fuss over it. You can dislike certain speech patterns without having to go on a crusade against…

I think fascism is a bad term to use here, totalitarianism or thought-policing is more what you mean.

Fascism refers to specific political beliefs including totalitarianism plus some form of cultural supremacy (typically racism, but it can also be religious or nationalistic), rigid hierarchy, and might-makes-right morals. Not all totalitarian regimes are fascist, and the behavior you're describing is neither hierarchical nor racist, so I don't think it's fascist in any way.

And I'm not saying this to simply be pedantic. Fascism is scary and powerful because of the specific combination of those ideas, especially the militaristic efficiency of fascist organizations. PC/woke mobs are not scary in the same ways, and need different precautions.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go show your kid a real factory farm instead of a high-end butcher in a trendy food hall and report back! Easy experiment to run and your kids’ reaction could settle this debate.

Of course seeing something you haven’t seen is shocking. To make someone give up meat is a stretch. My kids have been up close and personal to butchers in wet markets chopping up fish, pigs and chickens in Taiwan. This is the daily way of life for billions of people. I believe people over estimate the reaction this would garner from most of the world’s population, which indicates to me that a similar reaction would h…

So the shock of a factory farm is just the shock of “seeing something new,” akin to going to Disneyland for the first time?

OP said “more people would be vegan” which I think is strictly true. Everyone? No. Would a lot of people reduce their meat consumption from the currently obscene 150+ animals per year (average American)? Probably.

Re: George Carlin's "Soft Language" (2019)

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> * Car crash -> automobile accident --- a softening, though he's getting some mileage out of switching "car" to "automobile" (I can hear his voice very clearly in my head dancing over the syllables in "auto-mo-beeel") and the real language is "car accident". They're very rarely if ever "accidents"

Webster's: 1a: an unforeseen and unplanned event or circumstance Their meeting was an accident. 1b: lack of intention or necessity : chance They met by accident rather than by design. 2a: an unfortunate event resulting especially from carelessness or ignorance Car accidents match one or all of these definitions.

The first two are precisely what most car "accidents" are not. They're usually the result of negligence, which is captured in 2a, but the definitions which carry a lack of any agency usually overshadow the meaning in 2a.

This is why it is a great "soft" word because of the inherently fuzzy meaning.

Almost always in a "car accident" one or both parties, often along with the DOT, fucked up and need to do better. You shouldn't use language that allows it to be viewed as totally unforeseeable.

Post reply on HN