PDA

View Full Version : Thought limiting speech


kd5kfl
08-11-2007, 05:31 AM
I googled Thought Limiting Speech. Not one post on the whole ninnynet. Strange. I believe that this terminology should be better known. A tool for perceiving the world around you. Like reading Machiavelli, or Sun Tzu, or Eric Hoffer. The world makes more sense when you can are aware of thought limiting speech.

Thought limiting speech: Speech calculated to prevent others from disagreeing with you. Plenty of it here. Doesn't seem to work.

There is an old unattributed saying, the gist of which is:

"He who controls the vocabulary controls the debate."

One group says Pro Choice and No Choice. The other side says Pro Life and Pro Abortion. The theory is that you can prevent undecided individuals fom thinking wrong thoughts by labeling your position as the belief of a thoughtful person, and the other sides beliefs as unthinkable. The problem with this theory is that in reality you only limit your own thoughts.

Examples:

Businessmen become Fat Cat Businessmen.

Liberals renamed Knee Jerk Liberals.

Democrats rechristened Tax and Spend Democrats.

Conservatives are labeled Neokons. Whatever that means.

A foreign country you like has a government. A foreign country you don't care for has a regime.

Loyal and Patriotic American. Over the course of half a century I have been told I am not a Loyal and Patriotic American because I am not a member of the "In-awr-aye", the "Ky-Ky-Ky" or the "Jawuhn Burch Sassi-uh-tay". If someone could explain the link between extreme right wing beliefs and the inability to pronounce vowels correctly...

Thought limiting speech does not reinforce a point of view. It does not refute an alternate point of view. It is meant to reduce the likelihood that an undecided person will adopt the other point of view.

Old Bedouin nomad expression:
"When buying a camel, look more to the seller than the beast".

I believe that many who use this tactic do not perceive it as a weak and counterproductive tool, are unaware that the technique exists and has a name, do not know that they come across as a person unable to articulate a lucid and cogent argument for their cause. Selling you a camel by bad mouthing the other camel dealers products.

A suggestion: When reading the political posts here, pay attention to which posters use thought limiting speech to belittle alternate points of view. Then put those posters on your PHNML - your "pay him no mind list".

Gets real quiet real quick, when you do that.

AE6IP
08-11-2007, 05:41 AM
NewSpeak -- Orwell

K5FH
08-11-2007, 05:51 AM
Our politicians have raised this to an art and reduced it to a science. #They couldn't operate without it.

Many people don't know that there is no legal requirement for the title of a bill to have any relationship whatsoever to the contents of the bill.

For example, they will name a bill "The Child Molestation Prevention Act" even though the proposed legislation has nothing to do with preventing child molestation and, in actual fact, is designed to spend (waste) money on pork projects for certain congressmen's districts. #But any politician who opposes the bill knows he would be crucified in the media for "being against protecting children" so he ends up voting for it.

The idea is to apply a label that embodies a conclusion without analysis. #After all, who could possibly be against protecting children?

The heluvit is, it works more often than not.

KP3FT
08-11-2007, 02:13 PM
I couldn't agree more, and it bothers me how easily fooled people are. I've always compared it to photo-realism. Photo-realism art is so good, that at first glance it looks like an actual photograph. However, on close examination, it is determined to be a painting, not a photograph.
In books, articles, debates, etc. the same principle is applied, but this time words are the pigment, the pen or keyboard is the brush, and the canvas is the page or computer screen. The perceived "picture" is in the mind of the observer. Many times a casual reading of one of these "pictures" is convincing, but a closer look at the "pigments", or words, reveals the true nature of said "picture", whether it be a particular agenda or opinion disguised as "fact" or "truth". Some people are master artists with the written word, but only present an illusion of reality, just like a photo-realistic picture.
73 Jeff KP3FT

W3MIV
08-11-2007, 02:16 PM
Around here, "thought" limits a lot of speech.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

kd5kfl
08-11-2007, 02:21 PM
There is a post on the board right now that is a textbook example of thought limiting speech.

"General says bring back the draft"