Flawed Logic

Logic

Synonym, according to Dictionary.com: “science of reasoning, sound judgment, coherence, good sense, thesis, and antithesis and synthesis.” Also, “argumentation, sanity, rationale, connection, train of thought, and deduction.” Antonym: “unreasonableness.”

Those of us current events junkies hear a lot about “flawed logic.” In the context of current events the phrase is typically applied by trolls and Fox News “journalists” as a way of dismissing anyone with a point of view that is different from their own, i.e. “what you are saying is not in line with what I think, therefore your logic is flawed.” Often these folks will back up their opinion with comments such as “the truth hurts.” Because their opinion is a fact, and that sucks for everyone that doesn't agree.

We could dissect the definitions of fact and opinion and how they've just been employed, but I don't want to. Yeah, that's all. A fact is a fact and an opinion is an opinion. It's not rocket surgery, y'all. How we arrive at an opinion can be based on facts, but also individual experiences, thoughts, and ideas, and those are not necessarily facts. “The truth hurts,” is another one. It's been said that you're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts. There is a broad populace that either did not get that memo or didn't feel like reading it. And, really. What's more flawed about a person's logic when they ardently refuse to even consider anything “truth” other than his-or-her own thoughts??

My logic may not match yours, but that's not the same thing as my logic being flawed. I'm a huge fan of being online, but being online has given us a terrific platform for shouting down others without actually shouting. A person can literally tell someone to fuck off and die and never actually have to face that person or listen to them. It's the equivalent of placing one's fingers in one's ears and saying, “lalalalalaaaa.” People can be “ALL CAPS PEOPLE” with no repercussions of verbal abuse, infliction of emotional harm, or hatespeech. Their first amendment rights preclude everyone else's right to not be publicly lambasted.

Okay, so that one isn't in the Constitution, and I think most people don't publicly lambaste others just for stating a point that's different from their own. But that's just one woman's opinion. My grandmother used to say that your rights end where the next person's nose begins. I wish more people put more forethought into what they say and how they say it online the way they do in real life.

So does a difference in opinion, experience, or expression really mean someone else's logic is flawed, or is logic, like so many other things in this world, subjective??

Human experience is not like math, where 2+2 will always equal 4. People hear things, and feel things, and think, so what seems like it should equal 4 to you might not to me. Is that inherently illogical?? And, if so, to whom??

Whatdya Say??

I've had this conversation with my mom for a long time: she believes strongly that there are words people should not say to each other because it makes people think it's okay to say them. To break it down, when women call each other “bitch,” “cunt,” or “slut,” when black people call each other “nigger / nigga,” when gay people call each other “fag,” “queen,” “dyke,” and so on. I disagree with that. Yes, these words can be hatespeech, but it also depends upon context, which I think too many people miss out on.

When a woman says, “shut up, bitch,” to a friend in jest, or a black person calls someone “my nigga,” they're obviously not using hatespeech. It's cultural vernacular. I maintain that there are some words that other people don't have access to. It's really none of my business if black people want to use the n-word, or if gay people say “fag” to each other. If some of us want to try to take possession of the words others use to attempt to hurt them, who the hell else's business is it?? A young man on my Facebook friends list launched into a diatribe recently about how women shouldn't use the word “slut” if they want to be taken seriously. Frankly, I don't wish to be told what words I may or may not use, as a woman, from a man. He's entitled to his opinon, certainly, as I am entitled to have his opinion on the subject not matter to me. If I'm not out and about in the world, I will speak the way I wish to speak. I feel like someone that's taking one example of something someone says as whether or not to take them seriously as a person, that guy isn't going to take me seriously anyway.

There is a time and a place in this world to censor ourselves. I think most of us can agree with that. For example, I'm aware that certain MRAs and their ilk don't want women in the workplace, any workplace, because women might want to hold them accountable for telling dirty jokes or calling women derogatory names. I'm uncertain why it's so difficult for these men to behave themselves at work, or do they just think they shouldn't have to?? We're all required to engage in self-censorship from time to time. All of us. So when these men feel like they can't talk a certain way in certain company, well, welcome to everyone else's lives. Y'all don't want to be held to the same standards of decency and behavior as the rest of humanity?? Sorry, not sorry, bro.

This, to me, is an excellent example of privilege. Perhaps white people should just not use the “n-word??” Perhaps straight people should be more sensitive about using language that is anti-gay when coming from a straight person?? And maybe dudes should just not use “bitch” or “cunt” because those words do not belong to them?? My mom asks how people can possibly know which words they have access to and which they don't. My answer is critical thought. A culture of believing you have access to another culture's language is privilege. That is a kind of cultural appropriation. If you are an intelligent, thoughtful person you likely can think about what you say before you say it, and if you slip up and say something that hurts someone else you can stand up like good person and apologize. Some speech is not open for use by everyone. It's just not. I don't understand why that's a difficult concept.

I'm not talking about being PC. I know that's a big buzz phrase among folks that want to avail themselves to power over others by being insensitive shitheads and then accusing them of being too sensitive. All that means to me when I hear it is that the person saying it doesn't think that they should have to think before they speak or take responsibility for what falls out of their face. I'm saying think about what you say, whom you say it to, and what it means, not just to you but to your listener. Why is that such a challenge?? Use your fucking head and don't be a dick. If that's how you define “PC,” then I can't stop you but I beg to differ.

You know how in the Harry Potter books people won't say “Voldemort” out loud, and they call him “He Who Must Not Be Named,” and Hermione points out that by skirting around the fear associated with the name makes Voldemort remain powerful?? Well that's kind of how I think about this. You remember when George Carlin spoke about how, “they're only words??” Well, they are. If you don't like them, don't use them. If someone says something hurtful to you using one of them, call them out. Or don't. Chances are they won't care, because insensitive people don't give a shit how they impact others. Chances are they won't own shit. And they won't have any grasp upon why what they said was hurtful, because context belongs to them alone, and they'll tell themselves that they're smarter than you are because you have feelings. I think it's little more than a play for some kind of perceived superiority, but that's just one woman's opinion.