The purpose of this blog is to open a discussion forum for ideas, ramblings, debates, and random thoughts that pass through the heads of the students presently in Poudre High School's Theory of Knowledge Program.
Let's see how long this stays up here before it is deleted.
Ben, I can't delete you - only Mr. Malone can. What, exactly, are you trying to elicit with this comment? Could you please keep the TOK blog expectations in mind?Mrs. King
"WTF" is an often used phrase when faced with something people find either wrong, surprising, or controversial. What am I trying to ascertain with this question, other than a cynical view on the question? Why are we so challenged. The people who lobby for freedom of speech, or equal rights for all seem to condemn more than any other group. There can never be such a thing as "freedoms" as long as we have this division. WTF?
I'm not sure it is my job to censor you. All I would ask is that you write what you mean to ask. My request of you would be that you post your 2nd comment as your question since it gets at what you are asking people to comment on. Are you soliciting a reaction or a thoughtful response? With what you have written, I'm not sure you will get either.
Well i think that this is related to the Collegian article, so a lot of those responses may be applicable here.However, when this was an issue in the Silver Quill I was a little surprised. I mean, I understood that it could be seen as the administration condoning "inappropriate" language (im not sure what constitutes inappropriate language since we all have freedom of speech), however, I'm not sure that it should have been censored either.Ben, i wasnt sure exactly what you meant by "The people who lobby for freedom of speech, or equal rights for all seem to condemn more than any other group. There can never be such a thing as "freedoms" as long as we have this division." Do you mean that those groups who lobby also condemn more than others? Or that they are attacked more than others?
I think that this is a strange topic. The clarity is lacking. I think that it really goes back to curse words and their use, and I find it humorous that saying "WTF" or "Frick" are more socially acceptable than using the actual F-bomb, even though we all know what is meant by the others. I think that this brings about the idea that language, the word itself, is what is most inappropriate, not so much the idea behind it. If it were the idea, then all association with it would be deemed unexceptable. However, it is not. We are afraid of that particular word, just the word. Similar to s***. We can say crap, but not the other. Why is this? What has happened to make certain words taboo, but not others that carry teh same meaning? OR is the meaning more extreme?
I find it strange that other people, or I for that matter, are trying to make justifications for a clearly cynical post. Is it because we are forced? Is it because we don't want to see someone's feeble attempts at humor go to dust?
I can understand what Sierra is saying about just being afraid of the word itself, but I have experience. I remember when I was young, my brother would always get mad at me when I said "Jeez" instead of "Jesus" when I was upset, for he believed that I was still implying the same thing with Jeez. For the most part, I agree with what Sierra said. For the most part, I can use a very similar word to the profanity, but it is okay because it is not the profanity itself. However, sometimes the mere IDEA of the word can be frightening as well. On a lighter note. Ben, I think this post was actually funny, but because I am an IB and TOK student, I need to analyze it. I have to!Rick Andrews
Post a Comment