Are You Offended?

I've never understood why one gets offended by a belief. Our socio-cultural language system is set up to restrict all belief to the status of opinion. Anything more than that is offensive. Our language contains this structure and it imposes it consistently. We must start any statement of belief with "in my opinion," or "For me …" or a hundred other variants that make it clear that our statement is opinion not fact (or that there is no such thing as fact), in order to avoid the wrath. Just listen to how we talk and the rules involved and how this translates into expectations and punishment. Violating these expectations, in my opinion, is the beginning of offensiveness for the masses. This sensation of offense is what becomes the modern breakdown of communication (the lack of dialogue).

I am aware that my point is going to sound over-simplified. I would contend that it is simple because it's true, but that the value in its simplicity is lost and blocked by our socio-cultural language game.

Think of it this way: I think procreation is a bad idea and I don't mean this as an opinion, I'm trying to stretch it broadly over reality. An opinion is couched in contingency, "It's just me, but …." I'm trying to say it in a way that means it is a truth I have uncovered, but one that is not my own.

I'm saying that "procreation is bad" in reality - as a fact outside of me - even if I don't say it. If I'm dead and gone the truth (that more people is a bad thing) still exists without me. I know this idea (of objectivity) is a tough concept to understand in our culture, but let's try.

In fact, when I was teaching, it always surprised me how hard it was to begin the process of explaining a difference, for students, between subject and object. It was almost like they were wired to reject the distinction completely.

I'm not a legislator and I have no power over you. So, my idea, though I'm presenting it as fact, doesn't hurt you. It is merely dialogue. The idea itself, the language I use, even the style, has no real effect on you if you see it for what it is. But for some reason, when we violate this precondition of modern speech, we offend. That is to say: anyone with whom we disagree has an emotional reaction that is reinforced and supported by this social construct within language. So what is causing this?

I'll tell you: a subjectivism rooted in a culture that - perhaps subconsciously - doesn't take reality seriously. Anyone violating this (asserting truth as truth) is presumptuous and "bad." It isn't as simple as subjectivism, or relativism, or solipsism as the enemy. It is a complicated language game that begins with Western Philosophy's denial of reality - a system of perpetual skepticism that perverts our natural system of knowing into a tool to mystify anything we want another to believe.

Our society can no longer tolerate truth in commonsense form. It is interesting, as a side-note, that we seem to entertain ourselves with negative truths ("There is no truth," or "There can never be certainty," or "induction can't prove induction," etc.) even though we aren't aware of the irony. But the assertion of a positive truth, whether it be that procreation is bad, or that women aren't as strong as men, or that fat people are a burden on society and unhealthy, is too much for our language to bear. The punishment is the claim of "offense." The punishment is designed to be a collective condemnation not just of the premise of the speaker but of his confidence and it is backed (uncritically) by the social contract inherent in language.