The consensus answer among philosophers to the first question is that slurs, as a matter of convention, signal negative attitudes towards targeted groups. Those who pursue this answer are committed to the view that slurs carry offensive content or meaning; they disagree only over the mechanisms of implementation. An alternative proposal is that slurs are prohibited words not on account of any particular content they get across, but rather because of relevant edicts surrounding their prohibition. This latter proposal itself raises a few pertinent questions: How do words become prohibited? Whats the relationship between prohibition and a words power to offend? And why is it sometimes appropriate to flout such prohibitions? These are interesting questions.
What is the trick?
【sat阅读:Speech and Harm and SAT Trick】相关文章:
★ sat阅读:Speech and Harm and SAT Trick
★ SAT阅读材料 gene regulatory network
★ SAT阅读:American Academy of Arts and Sciences
★ SAT阅读资料:Dopaminergic mind hypothesis
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02