Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Jinn · 06-20-2006, 06:28 AM

..may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.

If we assume that one is capable of objectively analyzing another's "goodness" or morality, what importance would you put on what the person said? Rather than saying "everything," "nothing" or somewhere in between, I mean it in a relativistic sense. When judging another person, how much importance would you place on the character or content of their speech?

This question was inspired by a discussion between my SO and I regarding a mutual acquiantance. "E" has a notoriously bad mouth, and it wouldn't shock anyone to hear things like as "Hey, let's go find us some us some bitches!" or other senselessly derogatory comments. I believe that "E" is a still a good (and moral) person regardless of how he speaks, and my girlfriend holds the diametrically opposite position.

From this discussion I discovered that I place almost no weight on the character or manner of another's speech when determining whether I like them or whether they're a good person. As a matter of fact, many of my friends were dismissed as stupid or crude by my other friends simply because of the manner of their speech. When determining "goodness" I establish what I believe to be the probability that they'd lie, cheat, steal, or abandon someone.

My position: I hold those who would lie, cheat, steal, or abandon and yet speak niceties to be far less moral than those who would not lie, cheat, steal, or abandon but will dispense inappropriate language.

Where do YOU place the weight? Why? Does your assumption change if the language is backed with malice? Ignorance?

06-20-2006, 06:28 AM	#1 (permalink)
Jinn Lover - Protector - Teacher Location: Seattle, WA	Sticks and stones... ..may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. If we assume that one is capable of objectively analyzing another's "goodness" or morality, what importance would you put on what the person said? Rather than saying "everything," "nothing" or somewhere in between, I mean it in a relativistic sense. When judging another person, how much importance would you place on the character or content of their speech? This question was inspired by a discussion between my SO and I regarding a mutual acquiantance. "E" has a notoriously bad mouth, and it wouldn't shock anyone to hear things like as "Hey, let's go find us some us some bitches!" or other senselessly derogatory comments. I believe that "E" is a still a good (and moral) person regardless of how he speaks, and my girlfriend holds the diametrically opposite position. From this discussion I discovered that I place almost no weight on the character or manner of another's speech when determining whether I like them or whether they're a good person. As a matter of fact, many of my friends were dismissed as stupid or crude by my other friends simply because of the manner of their speech. When determining "goodness" I establish what I believe to be the probability that they'd lie, cheat, steal, or abandon someone. My position: I hold those who would lie, cheat, steal, or abandon and yet speak niceties to be far less moral than those who would not lie, cheat, steal, or abandon but will dispense inappropriate language. Where do YOU place the weight? Why? Does your assumption change if the language is backed with malice? Ignorance? __________________ "I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel Last edited by Jinn; 06-20-2006 at 06:56 AM..