Tolerance is beyond ridiculous.

i blame arqon

I hate censorship.

Society on the whole is pretty flawed.

You should not seek truth and logic from the actions of the common man.

You should however use them as a model to becoming a less flawed variation of an ultimately flawed species.

like the UN trying to make illegal/ban blasphemy
shit like that makes my blood boil

Infidel..

if there is no bad ... where is the good?

wait for it.....





NIGGER

nazi-communist fag!

You're asserting the power of a word, and you feel like you're the one being wronged? You don't have to use a word that could offend someone, but you do. You are capable of intellectual thought, and you know the result/consequences. There is no excuse.

You want to change the meaning of a word? What for? So a new word can take it's place with the same meaning? It's not the sum of the letters that make the word "bad", it's how you use it. ANY word can be used in an offensive way. Sans getting rid of written/spoken language completely, this situation will always exist.

But how can anyone capable of intellectual thought truly be offended by a word?

Thought has nothing to do with your ability to take offense at a word that is offensive.

What lol? Thought has everything to do with your ability to be offended...

No, it has to do with your ability to respond. To not take offense at something offensive would mean that you don't understand what is being said.

How someone responds is unrelated, anyway.

I don't think not taking offense at something 'offensive' necessarily means you don't understand it. I just think the whole idea of any words being 'offensive' is ridiculous in the first place. Personally I fully understand when someone says offensive things to me, yet I hardly ever take real offense.

Taking offense is merely understanding that it was offensive. If you can tell the difference between something friendly or offensive, you can take offense. Your ability to understand that something is offensive is enough. The responsibility is in the hands of the user, not the victim.

No, taking offense to something is what unintelligent emotional creatures would do. Emotions are the lower/basic structures of the human mind which are very important. The thing is we have another higher region, which allows intelligent thought. Actually taking offense is a decision a person makes. You control the way you react, as the way you control you act.

Anyways, point is, why take someones right as a human to use sounds because people can't control their own emotions? I don't think we'll evolve as species/culture if we don't take control of ourselves first.

Btw you made my point. Not allowing people to say certain words only means there will be new words that will be given negative meanings. So, THAT CLEARLY SHOWS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND OURSELVES AND WHY A WORD MIGHT OFFEND OURSELVES. WE GIVE WORDS MEANING. you can call me a jewfaggotfuck, now I can choose to react with hurt feelings and cry to admins or whoever makes laws, or I can just understand you may be a lower functioning person who would resort to such words, or laugh because I choose not to take offense but think as those words as funny.

No, taking offense to something is what unintelligent emotional creatures would do. Emotions are the lower/basic structures of the human mind which are very important. The thing is we have another higher region, which allows intelligent thought. Actually taking offense is a decision a person makes. You control the way you react, as the way you control you act.

The fact that you disagree with me, and seek to set the record straight on your own views is proof that you were offended by my view point. If you were unable to make a distinction between positive and negative stimuli, you would not respond to anything.

Anyways, point is, why take someones right as a human to use sounds because people can't control their own emotions? I don't think we'll evolve as species/culture if we don't take control of ourselves first.

I see, so let's just remove emotions. Sounds easy.

Btw you made my point. Not allowing people to say certain words only means there will be new words that will be given negative meanings. So, THAT CLEARLY SHOWS WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND OURSELVES AND WHY A WORD MIGHT OFFEND OURSELVES. WE GIVE WORDS MEANING. you can call me a jewfaggotfuck, now I can choose to react with hurt feelings and cry to admins or whoever makes laws, or I can just understand you may be a lower functioning person who would resort to such words, or laugh because I choose not to take offense but think as those words as funny.

How you react has NOTHING to do with it. NOTHING. The fact that you understood that it was meant to be offensive is the power that the word has. Regardless of what the word is, any word can take on this role. You understand that jewfaggotfuck would be considered offensive, but you still decided to write it here, even though it could have offended someone here.

Your logic is broken. You want tolerance for intolerance, but you are intolerant of intolerance. In your world, you would go to jail for being shot, since it was clearly your fault for being there to get hit. Got raped? Your fault for not agreeing with the attacker's position. Your argument of this very concept is proof that you don't even understand, or agree, with what you are trying to argue.

actually no. I knew you would come back with that statement of something like being shot. You can't control what happens while being shot or stabbed. But words are truly different. You can control how you react towards a word. You don't want to seem to take responsibility for your own reactions. Because you don't seem to realize reactions are actions. Why take offense to some word? You can choose to take offense to it. You are trying to say we have no control or don't want to take control and are doing what I said in my journal, you want to give blame to others. You want to control what the other person says, instead of taking control of ourselves and how we react to something has may or may not find offensive.

Again, to this point, where you say I took offense to what you said, that's ok we can take offense but at the same time I'm not trying to remove what you said or get you from stopping it. I choose to read it, understand it - then understand myself and why I would react that way.

I also enjoyed what you said about removing all emotions which is basically the same point I made about removing all words. There will always be words that people try to use to hurt others, but guess what, we have control of what we ALLOW TO HURT US. Most people don't seem to understand we have that control.

"You can control how you react towards a word."

This is true, but can you really assume that the rest of the world actively thinks about re-programming themselves to completely ignore words which are hateful? The purpose of such words is to convey hate unto another individual or group. To completely eradicate the entire meaning of the word in your own mind, then stricken it of any purpose is very unreasonable. All words have purpose, that is the entire reason they are used. It is completely unreasonable to attempt to apply your standards to the rest of the world not to mention small minded.

To publicly propogate these offensive words because you deem them to be meaningless shows gross mis-understanding of other individuals and society as a whole.

If you understand what I am saying, then you will understand why Will nuked those comments. Besides he had great reasoning that went further than mere moral principle.

The entire censorship argument is fucking bullshit. Honestly, censorship is only bad when truth is being concealed, or an opinion which is reasonable and justified even if it is wrong. Idle horse shit on a gaming website when the clear intention is to fish for improved status (+'s) amongst those users, by means of blind hate? Fucking please.

He should have deleted them, not nuked though.

You don't understand what I'm saying. I get that words have the meaning to hurt or offend, the problem is when those who allow it to hurt them they want to make laws/or try and end the use of those words. You say I'm the one who misunderstands society? I understand that people are always trying to change people when they get offended because of something. All I suggested is instead of trying to get rid of words that hurt or remove posts that may hurt, why don't we change HOW WE OURSELVES REACT TO SUCH THINGS. You do seem to understand words have meaning, but you don't seem to understand that we give them meaning which can be changed.

Again, you say I'm trying to CHANGE PEOPLE, I'm saying why don't we change ourselves? People want others to change by making laws and or rules to forbid things. There will always be words, so why not change the way we react to negative things? AGAIN IM ASKING WHY WE CAN'T CHANGE OUR OWN PERSPECTIVES SO AS WE DONT GET BUTT HURT BY WORDS. WORDS R WORDS WE GIVE THEM MEANING.

People will always say/do things. In doing so, they communicate a message (behaviour, feelings, opinions etc.). Whether you choose to change yourself to no react to something that you previously conceived to be offensive does not change the fact that a message was conveyed by the other party. I think choosing to not react to certain things means lack of evolvement.

Lets assume there is an isolated group of people. One person within that group constantly expresses himself in a racially,derogatory (or whatever else is considered offensive) manner (words). The rest of the group ignores it. Now either the person smartens up himself or he doesn't because he doesn't know how. Assuming he doesn't, then he cannot evolve as a person in such a way that would be 'generally' accepted. In your act of non-involvement you actively contribute to the lack of evolvement and in return actually making yourself the lower functioning person.

I mean, who is 'dumber', the person who just cannot change himself/others, or the person who can change but chooses not to because it is convenient?

being offended doesn't matter. We give power/meaning to words. If the group decided to change the meaning of negative words then what?

Seems everyone here just sticks to the same old thing of blaming others. You see it everywhere and are raised with it. Too much work to change myself, easier to make a law or rule then deal with my own emotions/thoughts.

"Stupid" is offensive. "Stupid" is not banned in any way/shape/form. "Stupid" is still used every single day.

Laws or restrictions have absolutely nothing to do with this.

Actually it does. Because that was my point. People here, if you read in my other posts, which you don't seem to have the ability to do, was about being trying to get rid of certain words like "Retarded" "GAY" "NIGGER" and such things. Because people are offended by them. They are trying to change what people say. I rarely say these things but I don't want to be told that I can't say words because another person can't not control their own emotions and understand words only have the meaning we give them. If we give certain words that power then you deserve to get your panties in a bunch and offended.

Or, better yet, if you stopped using words in such offensive ways, there would be no need for the laws. Making murder legal would not eliminate murder.

you cant change a death into life. you can change how words are handled though. See how your stupid logic is flawed? Why do you keep trying use something like murder and comparing it to people who want to get rid of words or can't handle words.

You can't handle murder because it is considered wrong socially. By your logic, there is no good or bad, and no wrong or right. As such, you can't possibly hold someone responsible for murder - most especially against you.

How can you change how words are handled in a way that you could not with murder? Give me even so much as one example, and I'll gladly point out how wrong you are.

You don't understand what he's saying...

When someone says something to you, you automatically gauge whether it was a friendly remark or an offensive remark (simplified obviously), if you come to the conclusion it was meant in an offensive manner you find it offensive.

How you react to this is a totally separate issue.

actually no. I knew you would come back with that statement of something like being shot. You can't control what happens while being shot or stabbed. But words are truly different.

You can't control what you hear.

You can control how you react towards a word. You don't want to seem to take responsibility for your own reactions. Because you don't seem to realize reactions are actions. Why take offense to some word? You can choose to take offense to it.

Your active choice to not "take offense" does take away offense from the word. You're simply REACTING, but the word will always hold the value of offense.

you are trying to say we have no control or don't want to take control and are doing what I said in my journal, you want to give blame to others. You want to control what the other person says, instead of taking control of ourselves and how we react to something has may or may not find offensive.

Did you read a single thing I said? The full and total responsibility is on the person who uses words, with none of it on the victim. Nobody is forcing you to use words that would/could be offensive, but you do anyway. You could go your entire life without saying these words, and it would yield the end result that you seem to want.

Again, to this point, where you say I took offense to what you said, that's ok we can take offense but at the same time I'm not trying to remove what you said or get you from stopping it. I choose to read it, understand it - then understand myself and why I would react that way.

You either react positively, or negatively. In this case, you disagree with me. You consider my point of view negative. Your ability to disagree is your same ability to determine if a term is offensive or not. If this didn't offend you, you wouldn't respond in any way. If the idea of words holding offense didn't offend you, you wouldn't have written your blog post.

I also enjoyed what you said about removing all emotions which is basically the same point I made about removing all words. There will always be words that people try to use to hurt others, but guess what, we have control of what we ALLOW TO HURT US. Most people don't seem to understand we have that control.

Again, this is response. Simply because you choose not to respond to something does not mean you do not take offense. I think you biggest problem is understanding how communication works at a fundamental level.

I don't think you understand the words I'm using. You're english must be limit to only certain understandings.


Just because I'm responding to you doesn't mean I take offense at all. just trying to show you we can change ourselves instead of changing others through laws and rules. I don't want to be told I can't say certain words because people get whiney or butt hurt over it.


Why you keep going back to taking offense when the main point(you probably don't make it this far) was about words being banned or taking away from people even though new words would just replace them. I don't think you understand how brain functioning works. We can take offense but how we react to either physically or mentally can be controlled. I don't see where you're going with this 'offense' stuff. As you're wrong on all cases about it.

When walking down the street someone yells out "you piece of shit" I laugh and think "that is something". I don't go a try and pass a law saying people can't say "bad names" freedom of speech should mean being able to say anything. If people want to allow themselves to be harmed by words, that seems SILLY imo, why cause stress hormones (then physically hurting yourself) to be released because you take the meaning so hard?


Dunno why you think just because someone states something negatively you HAVE to take offense or be hurt by it. Guess culture raises people that way..

oh and if you reply (your argument) you must be some alien weirdo who eats penis. cause your brain is the size of a peanut. lol!

You're english must be limit to only certain understandings.

"You're english must be limit" - Enough said. Stay in school.

Again, you rant on without understanding the position you are trying to advocate. Words being banned has nothing to do with this. Nothing. Not even a little bit. Social acceptance of not using terms that are considered extremely negative is completely logical. For the most part, the only place this is really restricted is on television.

Nothing is stopping you from using these words in your social circle. If the social system in which you take part in is against it, why do you do it to begin with? Why did you use a negative term to begin with? Why are you obviously standing in the way of the bullet?

You are taking offense at my view on this subject this very second. You can't stand the fact that my text is up here, and you need to have yours up to argue your (albeit uneducated) position. What you don't see, is the lower level of what is going on in communication, or the need for it. You're essentially arguing against math/science/logic/opinion, all while trying to use them (albeit poorly) to argue your point.

MAN YOU SEEM AWFULLY UPSET YOU NEED TO REPLY WITH VERY UNEDUCATED RESPONSES. why are you so offended?

See? You're already getting upset that I've torn your argument apart. Even more angry that I pointed out the failure of the insult that you failed to execute. Even though I don't use direct personal insults, or any offensive slurs, I am able to hurt you.

This is just one example of how it doesn't matter what the words are, but how you use them. If I were to meet you in person, I'm sure it wouldn't take long to find personal attacks that would offend you to the point of a reaction. Looking at your profile pic alone, you'd probably take offense at being called a wigger.

You're either figuring out that you're wrong, or too angry to know, but you've obviously given up on defending your position now. I accept your surrender, either way.

wrong wrong wrong :|

you read my comments and start assuming not realizing its your own brain reading but its tricking you into thinking its how im saying it.

lol!

I already accepted your surrender. If you wish to continue any sort of real discussion, you're going to need to find quite a few more words than "wrong."

Sorry for destroying your world view, as you've likely held it for a very long time. You'll get over it.

Guess this is your way of saving face or something. You know delude your already distorted reality of your life.

That's the spirit - get angry! You're unwilling to walk away, unable to argue without personal attacks, and inexperienced in the art of debate.

It angers you, even if not true, just because I write it. You are compelled to respond, as you care so much about how someone views you. This is the reason you want out of responsibility for your words, as you can't handle the pressure.

If you do wish to continue debating the theoretical situation that you propose, and continue to see the flaws in your thinking, I'm more than willing to educate you. If you think that you somehow look better for replying with no substance, you're still going to stop replying before I do.

Save time, see it my way.

better yet: how can anyone capable of intellectual thought truly be offended by a word on the internet?

Could you please explain what exactly this thread is about? I'm assuming it's some fucking retarded bullshit happening in the US atm.

He used an offensive term when talking to someone, and they were offended. He's mad because he doesn't want responsibility.

No, I didn't. It was never about being offended. It was more about people trying to get rid of words because they find them offensive.

such terms like "gay" and "retarded" There are some groups around here that want to get rid of some of these type of words. Trying to get people to sign petitions to not say them anymore. I was wondering why they would want to get rid of words since there will be new words to take their place. My goal was to try and get people to understand why they find these words offensive, that they don't have to get offended because they can choice another way to look at it.

I think people should take responsibility for their own reactions, people are going to say things, why let words have that power or that person have that power over you.

My goal was to try and get people to understand why they find these words offensive, that they don't have to get offended because they can choice another way to look at it.

Right, so interpret it like the bible. I didn't shoot you with my gun, you got shot by my gun. So long as any word can be described with other words, a word can carry offense.

I decide to call you a xigglebggle. You, of course, don't know this word. You can infer by the way my sentence is structured that it is a negative word, merely by the tone of my voice, or the use of it in the sentence.

"You're a flaming xigglebggle!"
"I wouldn't hang out with a xigglebggle."
"You? You're just a xigglebggle!"
"He's not very xigglebggle."
"I would never date a xigglebggle like you."

Now, even without the word actually existing, or having any direct meaning, you can sense the negativity. Stupid will always mean "a lack of intelligence", just as I can simply say, "you have a lack of intelligence." Should we change the meaning of intelligence so that a sentence of that structure cannot be formed, and so the description of stupid cannot be understood?

Words are a protocol, and only work because of their polarity.

words are sounds a bullet is something that can physically harm you without your choosing. you still don't understand even with intent to harm with words, the person still has a choice of whether to react. Stop trying to relate it to physical harms.

You seem to keep proving my point. Thank you tho. Words will have always be and new ones to offend will be made.

The bullet can only harm you if you are in it's way. Get out of the way, and you're fine. This is the logical position that you are trying to defend. It's not about physical, but you simply can't see the layers underneath the example.

Now stop wasting my tax dollars, and listen to your teachers.

wow your argument is that bad you have to use something like "a bullet can hurt you if you're in the way" LOL wow. and you thought my "you're" mistake was funny. You're comparing something that can be controlled to something you can't even move quick enough to dodge.

Taking offense isn't the problem its how people deal with it. I keep saying it and you can't seem to get through your head.

Dodged? Who said anything about dodged? If you hadn't been near me, you wouldn't be there to be in the way of the bullet. In fact, if you weren't alive, you couldn't be killed.

The logic you are using falls victim to this same set of issues, but you fail to see them. You're trying to address the result, instead of the cause.

Two different planes. Your logic is flawed to begin with. No sense in arguing two different scenarios. APPLES N ORANGES.

but if you're gonna compare it, and if you had the ability to heal yourself no matter the damage done, would you choose to bleed to death and blame the other person or change and heal yourself and move on? Because with words you still have the option on your behavior after some words are being said. Again, we GIVE MEANING TO WORDS. WORD R JUST WORDS THEY ARE SOUNDS. When a sound is made you have the option of interpratating it however you want.

See, you're pointing out how little you know about logic or protocols.

dlkhf sdjfhkd sdjfhsdkjfh allalksjh dfoiehwhfh aosihf kjdshfalkjdhf
asdjhfaskdjhf asdfk jhasdkfjhasjhf hdjkfh k'sdfa djkhsdf kajhsdflk
askdjfhasdf jkhflkahowiehfqwoehf ncmnosa obsdijfbakdjncv
asmdnbfapd lkajbdf oweb fo20einf jbnf oiwebf wjbaklbebf

This is an example of language in your world, only far more structured than it would really be. Without rules for language, there is no language. Potentially, language of this type would work without polarity, so long as there was no dimension of time involved. However, there is.

Need a more clear example? No matter how you interpret retarded, you still are.

tbh it's quite unexpected for me to hear such sophisticated words from you stunt. No offence really, you never ever showed this side when I used to play in the us!

i bet he let his father write this.

even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes.

Nothing is good or bad, only thinking makes it so.

things aren't really anything till we observe them.

Like the topic of drugs. Drugs aren't good or bad, they just are. It takes someone's opinion to make it so.

It's never the substance that is bad in nature, it is the reasoning the individual uses to justify it's use when the causation is known prior to the action. It is important to understand that process so that the individual can then take responsibility for the outcome, something I guess very few ever truly think about before they do something.

It is a shame that society does force moral labels upon us when we are young, "good" or "evil". But perhaps we are better off for it, the intelligent people will eventually grow into themselves and look more closely into all the aspects of their lives. Can the majority handle the responsibility to do and say whatever they want? It is hard to understand what society would become.

society is pretty shit as is. it's always someone else's fault for what we did never our own.

unpleasant words don't make people uncomfortable, unpleasant behavior does.

summary: white people want to be able to say nigger without people wanting to beat them up