This is such a complex subject and can seem quite academic when we get down to definitions. At the heart of it, though, is identity. We communicate to be seen, heard and validated as a human being and the person we are. This does not minimise the content of the communication which is often vitally important but we ignore the personal context at our peril.
More voices would be a really good way to explore this further, voices that are not all already aligned as challenge is essential to deriving a meaningful outcome. Those voices do, however, need to be aware of the many different levels on which communication occurs.
Deliberative democracy offers a route with lotteries + citizen assemblies to shatter such reality siloes.
It is analogous to replica exchange in Monte Carlo simulations on parallel computer simulations. Instead of an energy landscape of a molecule though, we are exploring the political landscape.
The end result is “citizen learning”. (As opposed to machine learning). In which we find people learning to see the world as others experience it through citizen assemblies.
There’s only so many times I can scream this at the world and hope they understand.
If you have such a round table then I can suggest some people from the deliberative democracy community to include because they’ve done a lot of leg work already!
The round table about how we use language you mention in the youtube video, i really hope you create and may I contribute a little about we use language pre-reflectively in ideology.
I have been exploring what i call Critical Theory Deservedness in how we divide nearly everything into groups or categories of deserving and undeserving based on socially constructed attributes or qualities. Like women’s work is less deserving of pay than mens work. It literally is in every aspect of life.
We do not think when we do this trick of language. We often interchange words in our daily usage. We say we love a food as an example. To my point, we often use the word deserve when we mean ought or should or even need.
People say everyone deserves respect or dignity. But more accurately they mean everyone should be treated with respect or dignity. The word ‘deserve’ implies that someone or something has a quality that justifies a suspension of the normal rules of ethics. For instance we often invoke meritocracy: “Joe completed his apprenticeship and he deserves more pay.” This seems reasonable. It implies that those who have not completed their apprenticeship do not deserve more pay.
While i do challenge even this notion of deservedness in other writings, i think it is important to understand that this is the exact language and logic behind sexism, racism, colonialism, homophobia, war, class, capitalism, ecocide, nationalism and so many other ways we divide nearly everything into groups or categories of deserving or undeserving.
But our language is fluid and not precise. So when we say everyone deserves love, we really mean everyone should be loved. We are not saying that everyone has some quality that makes them deserving of love. Or respect. Or dignity. Or to have their needs met.
How we use language often disguises some things. It is interesting which language seem to have made a differentiation between the words ‘deserve’ and ‘should/ought’.
When i asked ChatGPT to analyze which languages used deservedness it gave me the following:
“Roughly 30 to 40 percent of the world’s languages—mostly from colonial and Indo-European traditions—clearly distinguish between “deserve” and “should” using separate words. These languages often reflect a worldview where individual merit, moral worth, or earned entitlement plays a central role in justifying what a person ought to receive. In contrast, about 60 to 70 percent of languages—most commonly Indigenous, East Asian, Pacific, and many African languages—do not draw a sharp lexical line between “deserve” and “should.” Instead, they express obligation through relational, contextual, or situational language, focusing on what is fitting, appropriate, or harmonious within a relationship or setting, rather than what someone has earned. In these languages, the moral logic of obligation tends to be embedded in social roles or circumstances, not in personal merit. This difference reflects a broader cultural divide: colonial and hierarchical societies often linguistically encode individual desert, while many Indigenous and egalitarian societies frame moral action relationally, without invoking the deservingness of the subject.”
At 27:38 quote "that a man is woman, and a woman is a man" referencing gender identity misses basic Biology - - - and highlights those who think climate change is false because of that perceived 'inconsistency' in science did not take high school biology. X and Y chromosomes in pairs is not the full range of options. Klinefelters and Turner syndrome are just a few of several varied syndromes where extra or missing gender chromosomes occurs and has been identified for many decades. Indigenous cultures acknowledge this range of human beings... so no gender range is as SCIENTIFIC as is CLIMATE CHANGE https://scienceline.org/2020/10/beyond-x-y-chromosomes-and-sex-organs/
I look forward to future conversations on this issue of communication. So many important points were addressed, and a deeper dive would be much appreciated.
Facebook changed as soon as Obama was elected and the world with it. I remember a photo of Zuckerberg at Davos, hands in jeans, wearing a hoodie and surrounded by the wealthy, white elite who understood what he didn't. He had the most powerful propaganda machine ever imagine in his hands and he was oblivious. Not anymore sadly. Mainstream media threw in the towel when they broadcast the Trump "grab them by the pussy" tape and swapped clicks for ethics. Musk bought X to control the narrative and help build Thiel's infosys of personal data. All this combined with 40 years deliberate destruction of education and community space has yielded what we have today, when everyone is famous for 15 minutes no matter who or what they have to trample on to get there.
It’s due to our schools having been taken over by fascists about 40 years ago and people not aware of that or how important authentic schools are. Mostly, teacher whistleblowers have been trying to expose this since 2002 at WhiteChalkCrime.com and EndTeacherAbuse.org to no avail. Take a look at what they’re saying and you’ll understand how we lost humanity. The place that used to teach it stopped teaching it years ago. The lack of critical thinking due to this is also why so many people voted for Trump thinking he could fix things.
This was an excellent start to really important discussion of one of the most fundamental and peculiarly postmodern challenges we face today when it comes to effecting positive change or even arresting further extremism and societal disintegration. Please bring Damien back soon, Rachel —even better if you can assemble a roundtable. Would love to know who you’d like to participate in that. Might have some suggestions.
This is such a complex subject and can seem quite academic when we get down to definitions. At the heart of it, though, is identity. We communicate to be seen, heard and validated as a human being and the person we are. This does not minimise the content of the communication which is often vitally important but we ignore the personal context at our peril.
More voices would be a really good way to explore this further, voices that are not all already aligned as challenge is essential to deriving a meaningful outcome. Those voices do, however, need to be aware of the many different levels on which communication occurs.
Great subject - thanks, Rachel.
More talking!! 😜 Teasing out the space behind the words.
Yes, I would like to see this conversation pursued further.
Yes, please continue this conversation!
Deliberative democracy offers a route with lotteries + citizen assemblies to shatter such reality siloes.
It is analogous to replica exchange in Monte Carlo simulations on parallel computer simulations. Instead of an energy landscape of a molecule though, we are exploring the political landscape.
The end result is “citizen learning”. (As opposed to machine learning). In which we find people learning to see the world as others experience it through citizen assemblies.
There’s only so many times I can scream this at the world and hope they understand.
If you have such a round table then I can suggest some people from the deliberative democracy community to include because they’ve done a lot of leg work already!
The round table about how we use language you mention in the youtube video, i really hope you create and may I contribute a little about we use language pre-reflectively in ideology.
I have been exploring what i call Critical Theory Deservedness in how we divide nearly everything into groups or categories of deserving and undeserving based on socially constructed attributes or qualities. Like women’s work is less deserving of pay than mens work. It literally is in every aspect of life.
We do not think when we do this trick of language. We often interchange words in our daily usage. We say we love a food as an example. To my point, we often use the word deserve when we mean ought or should or even need.
People say everyone deserves respect or dignity. But more accurately they mean everyone should be treated with respect or dignity. The word ‘deserve’ implies that someone or something has a quality that justifies a suspension of the normal rules of ethics. For instance we often invoke meritocracy: “Joe completed his apprenticeship and he deserves more pay.” This seems reasonable. It implies that those who have not completed their apprenticeship do not deserve more pay.
While i do challenge even this notion of deservedness in other writings, i think it is important to understand that this is the exact language and logic behind sexism, racism, colonialism, homophobia, war, class, capitalism, ecocide, nationalism and so many other ways we divide nearly everything into groups or categories of deserving or undeserving.
But our language is fluid and not precise. So when we say everyone deserves love, we really mean everyone should be loved. We are not saying that everyone has some quality that makes them deserving of love. Or respect. Or dignity. Or to have their needs met.
How we use language often disguises some things. It is interesting which language seem to have made a differentiation between the words ‘deserve’ and ‘should/ought’.
When i asked ChatGPT to analyze which languages used deservedness it gave me the following:
“Roughly 30 to 40 percent of the world’s languages—mostly from colonial and Indo-European traditions—clearly distinguish between “deserve” and “should” using separate words. These languages often reflect a worldview where individual merit, moral worth, or earned entitlement plays a central role in justifying what a person ought to receive. In contrast, about 60 to 70 percent of languages—most commonly Indigenous, East Asian, Pacific, and many African languages—do not draw a sharp lexical line between “deserve” and “should.” Instead, they express obligation through relational, contextual, or situational language, focusing on what is fitting, appropriate, or harmonious within a relationship or setting, rather than what someone has earned. In these languages, the moral logic of obligation tends to be embedded in social roles or circumstances, not in personal merit. This difference reflects a broader cultural divide: colonial and hierarchical societies often linguistically encode individual desert, while many Indigenous and egalitarian societies frame moral action relationally, without invoking the deservingness of the subject.”
At 27:38 quote "that a man is woman, and a woman is a man" referencing gender identity misses basic Biology - - - and highlights those who think climate change is false because of that perceived 'inconsistency' in science did not take high school biology. X and Y chromosomes in pairs is not the full range of options. Klinefelters and Turner syndrome are just a few of several varied syndromes where extra or missing gender chromosomes occurs and has been identified for many decades. Indigenous cultures acknowledge this range of human beings... so no gender range is as SCIENTIFIC as is CLIMATE CHANGE https://scienceline.org/2020/10/beyond-x-y-chromosomes-and-sex-organs/
Yes, I would like to see this conversation pursued further.
Yes, please, we need more discussion and more philosophy!
I look forward to future conversations on this issue of communication. So many important points were addressed, and a deeper dive would be much appreciated.
Facebook changed as soon as Obama was elected and the world with it. I remember a photo of Zuckerberg at Davos, hands in jeans, wearing a hoodie and surrounded by the wealthy, white elite who understood what he didn't. He had the most powerful propaganda machine ever imagine in his hands and he was oblivious. Not anymore sadly. Mainstream media threw in the towel when they broadcast the Trump "grab them by the pussy" tape and swapped clicks for ethics. Musk bought X to control the narrative and help build Thiel's infosys of personal data. All this combined with 40 years deliberate destruction of education and community space has yielded what we have today, when everyone is famous for 15 minutes no matter who or what they have to trample on to get there.
It’s due to our schools having been taken over by fascists about 40 years ago and people not aware of that or how important authentic schools are. Mostly, teacher whistleblowers have been trying to expose this since 2002 at WhiteChalkCrime.com and EndTeacherAbuse.org to no avail. Take a look at what they’re saying and you’ll understand how we lost humanity. The place that used to teach it stopped teaching it years ago. The lack of critical thinking due to this is also why so many people voted for Trump thinking he could fix things.
This was an excellent start to really important discussion of one of the most fundamental and peculiarly postmodern challenges we face today when it comes to effecting positive change or even arresting further extremism and societal disintegration. Please bring Damien back soon, Rachel —even better if you can assemble a roundtable. Would love to know who you’d like to participate in that. Might have some suggestions.