I think semantics are important. What we call things, what we call people, make a difference. We are all aware of this, but conveniently forget it for personal, social and political purposes. A couple of examples follow.
First, why is everything a war? The war on abortion (see here), the war on women, the war on drugs. Wars on Republicans, Democrats. When arguing we refer to our opponent, as we do in political contests. Opponents in war, however, are a different thing. The goal in war is to defeat our opponent, but it typically involves killing them. It also involves demonizing wartime opponents. They are evil, or worse. In arguments we are not trying to kill anyone and should not demonize our opponents. The semantics of war affect how we visualize our opponents, and make it easier to engage in extremist rhetoric, allow us to make our opponents different from us, and bad.
Second, there has been the equivalent of grade inflation with regard to adjectives. In college, when told by a professor I had gotten an 'A' in a structures course he told me 'You did good. You got an 'A''. I did good (well, should have been well but...). Then it was great. Then fantastic. Now awesome. Things are referred to as epic, legendary. There are no more adjectives. Most people have never read an epic and so have no idea of what the term suggests. Odysseus had an epic journey home- 10 years of war and 10 years of wandering home (let's ignore the 9 years of it he spent with a nymph...). Seeing a concert is not epic. A performer does not reach legendary status until after death. Grendel is legendary. Pop performers are not.
There is a related alteration of words for death, although without 'grade inflation'. People used to die. They also pass on, pass away, lose their lives, have their lives cut short, lose their battles with disease. Meanwhile inanimate objects die- phones, computers, heaters, etc. Inanimate things break. Living things die. Next our phones will pass away.... It is an indication of our decathection from death and our personification of the inanimate. We can't quite accept that something that cost 1500.00 just broke after two years. It has to die. It has to have significance.
Last, there has been a change in definitions of disaster and loss. Disasters were the sinking of the Titanic, a tsunami. But now most losses, accidents and weather are termed disasters, catastrophes and calamities. Superstorm Sandy caused catastrophic damage. Really? It cost a lot, but hardly a catastrophe. All snow is now hazardous. All storms now may contain dangerous cloud-to-ground lightning. Every summer day has a threat of thunderstorms. Every hurricane is a disaster.
Some of this is merely the effort of each generation to define things with their own terms. Some of this, however, is the result of 24 hour news. The weather is just not interesting enough to hold our attention continually on a TV station. The weather has to be dramatic. With hundreds of channels, commentators and web sites talking about politics at all hours, political discourse becomes conflict, a war, as a way of justifying the coverage. To attract attention everything must be awesome. We don't send TV crews to cover good, or normal, or simple arguments. We send them to cover war and disasters.
And with this, I draw an end to this awesome observation, this epic piece of writing, a tremendous intellectual accomplishment, without which there would be a disastrous loss of knowledge, a catastrophic change in understanding that might lead to horrific loss of life.
Ted
First, why is everything a war? The war on abortion (see here), the war on women, the war on drugs. Wars on Republicans, Democrats. When arguing we refer to our opponent, as we do in political contests. Opponents in war, however, are a different thing. The goal in war is to defeat our opponent, but it typically involves killing them. It also involves demonizing wartime opponents. They are evil, or worse. In arguments we are not trying to kill anyone and should not demonize our opponents. The semantics of war affect how we visualize our opponents, and make it easier to engage in extremist rhetoric, allow us to make our opponents different from us, and bad.
Second, there has been the equivalent of grade inflation with regard to adjectives. In college, when told by a professor I had gotten an 'A' in a structures course he told me 'You did good. You got an 'A''. I did good (well, should have been well but...). Then it was great. Then fantastic. Now awesome. Things are referred to as epic, legendary. There are no more adjectives. Most people have never read an epic and so have no idea of what the term suggests. Odysseus had an epic journey home- 10 years of war and 10 years of wandering home (let's ignore the 9 years of it he spent with a nymph...). Seeing a concert is not epic. A performer does not reach legendary status until after death. Grendel is legendary. Pop performers are not.
There is a related alteration of words for death, although without 'grade inflation'. People used to die. They also pass on, pass away, lose their lives, have their lives cut short, lose their battles with disease. Meanwhile inanimate objects die- phones, computers, heaters, etc. Inanimate things break. Living things die. Next our phones will pass away.... It is an indication of our decathection from death and our personification of the inanimate. We can't quite accept that something that cost 1500.00 just broke after two years. It has to die. It has to have significance.
Last, there has been a change in definitions of disaster and loss. Disasters were the sinking of the Titanic, a tsunami. But now most losses, accidents and weather are termed disasters, catastrophes and calamities. Superstorm Sandy caused catastrophic damage. Really? It cost a lot, but hardly a catastrophe. All snow is now hazardous. All storms now may contain dangerous cloud-to-ground lightning. Every summer day has a threat of thunderstorms. Every hurricane is a disaster.
Some of this is merely the effort of each generation to define things with their own terms. Some of this, however, is the result of 24 hour news. The weather is just not interesting enough to hold our attention continually on a TV station. The weather has to be dramatic. With hundreds of channels, commentators and web sites talking about politics at all hours, political discourse becomes conflict, a war, as a way of justifying the coverage. To attract attention everything must be awesome. We don't send TV crews to cover good, or normal, or simple arguments. We send them to cover war and disasters.
And with this, I draw an end to this awesome observation, this epic piece of writing, a tremendous intellectual accomplishment, without which there would be a disastrous loss of knowledge, a catastrophic change in understanding that might lead to horrific loss of life.
Ted
A stupendous, awesome, wonderful, unbelievably insightful prose rendition of epic proportions...
ReplyDeleteI hope many read this before they kick the bucket, buy the farm, sleep with their fathers, go to the happy hunting ground or shuffle off this mortal coil.
-D-