Posted by zeugma on January 8, 2006, at 12:56:14
In reply to Re: Too bad attending no longer appeals to me., posted by alexandra_k on January 6, 2006, at 21:40:09
where people feel free to judge and abuse you?>>
I think you are making too strong a link between civility and absence of judgement and abuse.
Consider this famous example from Grice::
>>A is writing a testimonial about a pupil who is a candidate for a philosophy job, and his letter reads as follows: "Dear Sir, Mr. X's command of English is excellent, and his attendace at tutorials has been regular. Yours, etc." (Gloss: A cannot be opting out, since if he wished to be uncooperative, why write at all? He cannot be unable, through ignorance, to say more, since the man is his pupil; moreover, he knows that more information than this is wanted. He must, therefore, be wishing to impart information that he is wishing to impart information that he is reluctant to write down. This supposition is tenable only if he thinks Mr. X is no good at philosophy. This, then, is what he is implicating.">>
A has expressed the judgement that Mr. X is no good at philosophy while conforming to accepted principles of civil discourse. Suppose contents of the letter, by evil design on the part of A, were made known to Mr. X (or perhaps A was benevolently trying to get Mr. X out of the philosophy business to save him future embarrassment). Has anything uncivil occured (by the definitions I have extracted from the dictionary, from perusal of existing civility rules, and reflections on how they work in practice)? No. Has a judgement been passed, a negative one? Yes. Could this constitute abuse perpetrated on Mr. X? Yes. It shows a lack of respect for him, and a lack of decency beyond what sending the man a letter strewn with random obscenities could produce. Well, maybe Mr. X can read English, but can't put 2 and 2 together. In that case he can bolster his self-esteem with news of his command of his native tongue and regular attendance, and consider A's omission of more relevant details as a sign that A has no grasp of the first maxim of Quantity. Mr. X's thoughts are perhaps uncharitable, but he keeps them to himself, and moreover, he is wrong.
-z
poster:zeugma
thread:5509
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20051205/msgs/596589.html