Feminist prejudice

Subject: Feminist prejudice
From: miriam clinton (iriXx) (iriXx@iriXx.org)
Date: Thu Aug 18 2005 - 04:33:55 EDT


      Mainstream Emotive Reasoning

Logical fallacies are errors in reasoning that lead to unsupported
conclusions. Many are easy to identify and are either refuted or
avoided. However, other fallacies have become mainstream and are used to
support a variety of beliefs and assertions. One such class of fallacy,
that is often overlooked, is the appeal to emotions (emotive fallacies)
rather than reason or substance. In this regard, prejudicial language is
often used to attach a value or moral goodness to a particular proposition.

For example, “/any reasonable person would have to agree /…” implies
that disagreement is unreasonable without any substantive argument. Sen.
John Kerry recently used this argument when he stated, “/'I think a lot
of veterans are going to be very angry at a president who can't account
for his own service in the National Guard/.”

Similarly, statements by Kerry’s campaign in response to Vice President
Dick Cheney’s criticism of Kerry’s position on defense are emotive in
nature: "/The Vice-President's shameful remarks about a decorated war
hero like John who risked his life trying to save the lives of others
make it clear that the Bush campaign has no problem stomping on the
truth/." This response, which has been widely publicized, never dealt
with the substantive issue raised by the Bush campaign.

Reuters labeled Vice President Cheney’s remarks as an “/assault/” and
Bush’s criticism of Kerry’s voting record as an “/attack/”. Both are
prejudicial and evoke particular feelings without providing information.

Republicans make the same fallacious arguments to the same extent as
democrats. The examples I used here were simply from the latest
headlines, which happen to focus on Kerry. The problem seems to be the
press and the public want emotive language – this sells newspapers and
makes for “great” conversation. Politicians appear to be under great
pressure to defend themselves in one sentence and have succumbed to the
temptation to use negative prejudicial statements rather than substance.
While “mudslinging” is often decried it is consistently effective in
swaying the American public.

Posted by tim <http://www.blogicus.com/email_contact.php> at April 28,
2004 12:15 PM

  Glossary Of Technical Terms

from University of Aberdeen,

*EMOTIVE MEANING* Words have emotive meaning insofar as their meaning is
to be elucidated in terms of the expression of feelings or attitudes
(not ‘opinions’) in the hearer and / or the evocation of feelings or
attitudes in the person addressed. In so far as an utterance has emotive
meaning , it has no TRUTH-VALUE, but it may be sincere or insincere.

*EMOTIVISM* Emotivism, or the emotive theory of moral judgements,
maintains that moral utterances (‘…is good’; ‘…is wicked’) are to be
understood wholly or primarily in terms of EMOTIVE MEANING.

*DESCRIPTIVE MEANING* Utterances whose meaning is to be elucidated in
terms of reporting or describing actual or possible facts or states of
affairs have descriptive meaning. Contrast EMOTIVE MEANING.

And finally, to the music:

      *Howard Jones: Where are we going?*

Restraints were hoisted on at such an early age
Straps were tightened in the class
Scripts by the school sage
Putting out the spark
Left us in the dark

Possibilities shut right down
The cleaver of the uniform was handed down
Treated like a clown

Where are we going
Where are we going
What are we doing
What are we doing
Throwing it away like that
What are you doing
Throwing is away
All that potential
All that potential
Trickling away like that

We will refuse to be your clones or
Work in someone’s scheme
Let a person find themselves not be part
Of a machine that worships power and wealth
We need our sanity
A day will come when everyone will have
Their due respect
Hate will no longer be a twisted form of love

Where are we going
What are we doing
Throwing it away like that
What are you doing
All that potential
Trickling away like that

It seems today, the "restrains hoistened on" are those of the emotive
reasoning of Political Correctness, and that those who do not adhere to
the shock created by its buzzwords are immediately ostracized, instead
of examining the logic behind such statements.

I personally found Linda's suggestion that all men do not listen to
women highly offensive - and indeed prejudicial in itself.

Furthermore, in my (factual, true) experience, many more men have been
willing to listen to my interests and opinions on music than women - who
have oft been the culprits of going off into emotive reasoning and
dismissing my ideas based on their own feelings rather than rational


99% of aliens prefer Earth

www.iriXx.org www.copyleftmedia.org.uk

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST