Nick Sabalausky wrote:
You're attributing more to the idea of "words" than just "words". What you're describing is harassment. Yes, harassment involves words, but it's clearly more than just words. Such scenarios are not what I'm talking about. (Granted, the "sticks and stones" adage is traditionally used to pacify kids that were the victims of name-calling, so maybe describing it that way was inaccurate after all.) What I'm talking about is illustrated by this: On some show/song/game/etc., some character says: "Why can't I get my CPU fan to work?!?" "Why can't I get my dang CPU fan to work?!?" "Why can't I get my fucking CPU fan to work?!?" The intent, scenario, action, everything, is exactly the same. The only difference is the words. No one that tunes in, listens, and remains unharmed by one of those is ever going to be harmed by one of the others unless there's something seriously wrong with them. Sure, words can be used in ways that can harm, but the harm doesn't come from the words themselves. I can do hurtful things that involve words without ever going near profanity. For example, go up to someone who is insecure about their acne and use these particular words: "I'm surprised you are willing to show that face in public." Of course, one could argue that this particular *combination* of words is profane, but even that's not true: I could recite that exact same arrangement to a good friend with a good sense of humor, or to a mask-painter who's unveiling a piece from a private collection they had previously been very secretive about. Same arrangement, same words, different acceptability-levels. Conversely, I can use profanity in a way that doesn't harm anyone. "Oh, fuck, I almost overslept." Words like "that" can be used in ways that are highly offensive, and words like "fuck" can be used in ways that are completely benign - any word can be used either way. So clearly, the words themselves can't be inherently good or bad.
in other words: "Human languages are context-sensitive while programming languages are context-free". Except C++ of course, but that's a bad example of a programming language <g>
context-sensitive means that you need to have both the context and the language phrase to derive "semantic" meaning.
it's obvious that for a specific context, a phrase can indeed be hurtful much more than physical violence. Anyone who says otherwise, is lying to himself/herself. Like Don said, words can and did cause wars (under a specific context, of course)..
just my 2 golden-pieces..
