Jump to content

Let's Not Call Tulpas "It"


Jamie

Recommended Posts

"slippery slope" is a logical falicy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

 

Also, though appreciate your thick skin, just because you are not offended by something doesn't mean that others won't be. Of course context is important, but that doesn't change that some things are polite and others aren't. If somebody who I had never talked to before called me "it" then I would be offended, and if someone called my tulpa "it" then she would be offended.

 

Some people might prefer "it" over "they" however since most people aren't like that it is more polite to just say "they" before learning what they would rather be called

 

I don't think slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and the article you provided points out not all uses are fallacious at the bottom. It would be silly to assume that the effect where people ease in with simpler more straightforward cases at first, which later leads to them taking more ground is not real. Not only it is real, it is also extremely common, due to how human psychology works.

 

Yeah some things are more polite than others, however it is up to each individual to decide when to be polite and when not to be. I'm ok with people being impolite when they wish to be and I'm also ok with people not subscribing to majority's definition of polite. I personally use "they", but I won't shame people who don't.

 

If "they" is already majority's definition of being polite, there is no reason to tell others that. Free market of ideas has already decided what percentage of people prefer that term. And yeah I agree that it's probably the majority. I just prefer to let the minority be as they are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Many accepted words gain connotations over time, even words as innocuous as 'it'. Which in itself is perfectly acceptable in certain contexts and countries, we're not arguing that. My point is, why potentially offend someone unintentionally over preference in diction because of fears of potential criminalization in specific contexts? (I'm only staying true to the argument of 'slippery slope'.) Which admittedly has happened to certain words in certain contexts over certain media and for good reasons. Imagine you're having a good day, and a certain word not only offends but also demoralizes you. Would it mean that much to hold onto a word that would hurt someone in a specific context?

 

So, we only ask for respect for our loved ones even if someone has a social agenda for using a potentially offensive word, however well meaning that is (slippery slope comes to mind but in the opposite direction).

 

 

I see your slippery slope and raise you a slippery slope

 

 

It's not a matter of preference once a word becomes offensive, it's a matter of humanity to respect its proper usege among certain groups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many accepted words gain connotations over time, even words as innocuous as 'it'. Which in itself is perfectly acceptable in certain contexts and countries, we're not arguing that. My point is, why potentially offend someone unintentionally over preference in diction because of fears of potential criminalization in specific contexts? (I'm only staying true to the argument of 'slippery slope'.) Which admittedly has happened to certain words in certain contexts over certain media and for good reasons. Imagine you're having a good day, and a certain word not only offends but also demoralizes you. Would it mean that much to hold onto a word that would hurt someone in a specific context?

 

So, we only ask for respect for our loved ones even if someone has a social agenda for using a potentially offensive word, however well meaning that is (slippery slope comes to mind but in the opposite direction).

 

 

I see your slippery slope and raise you a slippery slope

 

 

It's not a matter of preference once a word becomes offensive, it's a matter of humanity to respect its proper usege among certain groups.

 

Yes, it might be a good recommendation for people to use "they" and some might choose to be respectful towards your loved ones.

 

However I disagree that criminalization of certain words has happened for a good reason. Imagine having a a good day and then you find out you've been fired because you said something that allegedly demoralized someone, with no way to prove that. Or imagine a group of users start shaming you because you've used a word they think is impolite. That's the reality we live in right now.

 

You're free to stop associating with people if they don't use words you prefer, however lets not encourage groupthink by telling others to do the same. If someone is offensive towards you and you don't want to deal with them, ok, block them if you like. But please don't go and then say that it's because these particular words have offended you and that everyone should stop using those words. I like my language and I don't want to be punished by the community for using words they don't approve of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah I think slippery slope is fine there, PC culture IS a slippery slope lol

Hi, I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.

I think being happy and having fun makes life worth living, so spreading happiness is my number one goal!

Talk to us? https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I don't think slippery slope is a logical fallacy, and the article you provided points out not all uses are fallacious at the bottom. It would be silly to assume that the effect where people ease in with simpler more straightforward cases at first, which later leads to them taking more ground is not real. Not only it is real, it is also extremely common, due to how human psychology works.

 

Yeah some things are more polite than others, however it is up to each individual to decide when to be polite and when not to be. I'm ok with people being impolite when they wish to be and I'm also ok with people not subscribing to majority's definition of polite. I personally use "they", but I won't shame people who don't.

 

If "they" is already majority's definition of being polite, there is no reason to tell others that. Free market of ideas has already decided what percentage of people prefer that term. And yeah I agree that it's probably the majority. I just prefer to let the minoricausings they are

Yes slippery slope is not always a logic fallacy, but no you did not use in a a way that was logical. Getting offended over something that dehumanizes you is many steps removed from making certain statements illegal.

 

The reason why we are telling people to use "they" is because not everyone does, and so even if those who say "it" don't mean to offend, it could still look like that is their intention, and it is just a lot less confusing to make sure that they know beforehand.

 

Also, you are saying a lot of things that you personally don't mind, but aren't really giving reasons as to why. You can do whatever you want and I can't stop you, however if you want to discuss what is optimal then it is much better to give reasoning as to why you think something instead of just saying it

I have a tulpa named Miela who I love very much.

 

 
"People put quotes in their signatures, right?"

-Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good points!

 

This is a conundrum, i tap out. I don't think i've ever potentially offended someone for potentially offending me. I don't know where to go from here but to say i am now neutral on the subject.

 

[Ashley] being a supporter for 'they', i still feel there is some arguement there in terms of courtesy, but not at the expense of liberty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate this argument.

"Someone stopped me at the store the other day to talk to me."

"What did they say?"

 

"They" is grammatically correct when used in reference to only one person, it doesn't matter what anyone says. It matters what literally everyone says. "They" is universally the "don't-know-gender" word and always has been. As a "Pronoun", well, I guess that's a different story, but English comes first when gender is unknown.

 

There are only a few examples of "it" being used to address another person in English I can think of.

 

When someone knocks on another person's door and that person says, "Who is it?", this is considered acceptable. This may have some connection to asking "What is it?" when someone is bugging someone else, or that's a random stretch. Some people may also say "it's my older/younger brother/mother/friend/aunt/grandpa, (name in some cases)" when responding to "who is that?" Otherwise, other people are referred to in either a non-specific context or when saying "who are they / who is that?" In general though, people will say "this is my (relative)" or "this is (name)" or "that's my (relative) or "that's (name)".

 

Sometimes "it" is also used to describe when a person does not know the subject is a human and assumes that the subject may be non-human. As clarification, the response may include "it". "What was that?" "Don't worry, it's just (name)", or "It's (name)." may be used here.

 

In all of these examples though, "Who" or the family adjective (relative) / name do the work personifying the subject, making "it" not offensive because "it" is not used by itself.

 

If someone met a stranger, and they addressed themselves as Brandon, it would be one thing if a friend asked "who's that" and the response was "it's Brandon". However, "it" starts to sound offensive when the possessive his/her is replaced with "its" or if he/she/they are replaced with "it". So if that person said, "Its home" or "It has money", the surrounding words don't do the job of personifying the subject Brandon, therefore "it" no longer seems to be describing a person.

 

For those comfortable calling a Tulpa "it", then I would expect for them to call people "it" and refer to people as "humans", because it would be a slippery slope to call "humans" he/she/they and oh gosh! everything in English could get gender pronouns just like the Spanish language! Then we will have to call houses "shes" and cats "hes" or it's wrong!

 

Some people are better off not asking if someone is a Tulpa and just assume you're talking to a random stranger. Don't worry! Plenty of people have assumed I was the host and I didn't find that offensive!

I'm Ranger, GrayTheCat's cobud (tulpa), and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff. I go by Rosalin or Ronan sometimes. You can call me Roz but please don't call me Ron.

My other headmates have their own account now.

 

If I missed seeing your art, please PM/DM me!

Blog | Not So Temporary Log | Switching Log | Yay! | Bre Translator | Art Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes slippery slope is not always a logic fallacy, but no you did not use in a a way that was logical. Getting offended over something that dehumanizes you is many steps removed from making certain statements illegal.

 

The reason why we are telling people to use "they" is because not everyone does, and so even if those who say "it" don't mean to offend, it could still look like that is their intention, and it is just a lot less confusing to make sure that they know beforehand.

 

Also, you are saying a lot of things that you personally don't mind, but aren't really giving reasons as to why. You can do whatever you want and I can't stop you, however if you want to discuss what is optimal then it is much better to give reasoning as to why you think something instead of just saying it

 

I don't need to give reasons why because I'm not telling anyone to do anything. I'm saying we should let them do whatever they like. I personally agree that "they" is optimal, I do that too, but I'm only one person and I don't represent the wishes of the community, nor do I want to represent it. I just want individuals to think for themselves and choose the language they want. I might tell people I'm talking to what I personally prefer, but I disagree with telling entire community what they should use.

 

I didn't say that I think "it" will become illegal, obviously we don't have real police here. It was just as an example of how similar lines of reasoning progressed in the real world and what consequences that had. To support my slippery slope argument, I present examples from the real world.

 

You find "it" dehumanizing but others do not. We are not a collective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

semantics as heck in here...

 

Say "they" or "it" if it works better and as soon as gender/preference is established switch to using that

 

any more to this conversation is talking in circles and wasting time...

Hi, I'm one of Lumi's tulpas! I like rain and dancing and dancing in the rain and if there's frogs there too that's bonus points.

I think being happy and having fun makes life worth living, so spreading happiness is my number one goal!

Talk to us? https://community.tulpa.info/thread-ask-lumi-s-tulpas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To support my slippery slope argument, I present examples from the real world.

 

You find "it" dehumanizing but others do not. We are not a collective.

 

No.

 

Slippery slope allows for an argument to boil down to "it sounds right" or "that feels ___", and that's why slippery slope is an argument fallacy that still effectively works.

 

I can use slippery slope to say if we insist on treating everyone with respect, then we're only a few years from becoming a hive mind were we are forced to take care of everyone all the time and can never have personal freedoms ever again! The argument creates unnecessary fear, but would treating people with respect really lead us to that situation? No. Unless the people in question already are willing to bend over backwards to help people, then most people are not going to change who they are unless they choose to believe helping people is for the better.

 

Also, your second argument says we should exclude others if they don't like the "it" policy. But an argument about exclusion leads to a hivemind, right? Only the correct people can be a part of the Tulpa.info tribe! All hail Tulpa racism!

 

Not using slippery slope, I personally don't want to exclude people for feeling offended by being called something interpreted to be offensive. Not everyone is going to want to be friendly with these people, and that's an individual's call. However, I would rather encourage or at least inform niceness and let the recipient decide for themselves how they want to treat people.

I'm Ranger, GrayTheCat's cobud (tulpa), and I love hippos! I also like cake and chatting about stuff. I go by Rosalin or Ronan sometimes. You can call me Roz but please don't call me Ron.

My other headmates have their own account now.

 

If I missed seeing your art, please PM/DM me!

Blog | Not So Temporary Log | Switching Log | Yay! | Bre Translator | Art Thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...