Extremes

[kvnchrist]

Could someone please explain this propensity for those people who are in the majority, either in politics or ideology to use this new pet phrase EXTREME to categorize dissenting opinions. It seems that since 9/11 and the rise of religious extremists that partisan pundits have seen fit to paint the other side with this moniker.

 

Does this add, detract from either opinions in your view or does it simply void out credible discussion when either side uses this tactic?

[Aurielius]

Extreme is a subjective in perspective, it largely depends on what you term main stream. however it is a convenient method of marginalizing a view that someone feels is too radical for their comfort zone. That being said there are true extremes that are so far out of the norm to be accurately categorized as such, ie: xenophobia or genocide (the justification or rationalization of either).

[grannywils]

Aurielius is correct, extreme is subjective. In addition, as an adjective, it is easy to throw onto almost any description. As an aside, I have recently been reminded that I have a tendency to overuse adjectives and have been watching that myself. However, I'm not sure that I would agree it is only the main-stream who are using "extreme" to catagorize dissenting opinions. I would be more inclined to agree with your last sentence, it has become something of a partisan word, used to describe just about anyone who disagrees with anyone else. I also agree with Aurielius when he says that it is frequently used to marginalize people. I find this is done much too frequently these days. Whenever we can be divided in some fashion, it seems to happen.

[myrmaad]

I completely disagree that the term is used subjectively in its proper context to describe historical political perspective. Extreme means, and I believe accurately should mean, extreme deviance from political Moderation.

 

When I was young Nixon was considered a conservative. By today's standards, Nixon would be labeled a RINO. That is all the proof I need to justify the current use of the term extreme.

[BlackBaron2]

"Extreme" is relative :)

 

Plus, the term along with "militant" is a little bit on the meaningless side these days since it's used against absolutely everyone.

[myrmaad]

"Extreme" is relative :)

 

Precisely.

 

You must look to the scale to find it. "Relative" is not the same as "subjective". In fact, "relative" is completely different than "subjective".

[Aurielius]

According to doctrines of epistemological subjectivism or relativism, there are no “truths” which are not subjective to persons and/or relative to individual beliefs, cultures, time periods, etc. Obviously this position covers a lot of potential ground — two people might both be relativists, but they might disagree on just what truth is relative to.

 

Unfortunately, most stronger forms of relativism are self-defeating — something demonstrated as early as Plato’s dialogue Protagoras:

 

Protagoras: Truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion.

 

Socrates: You mean that truth is mere subjective opinion?

 

Protagoras: Exactly. What is true for you is true for you, and what is true for me, is true for me. Truth is subjective.

 

Socrates: Do you really mean that? That my opinion is true by virtue of its being my opinion?

 

Protagoras: Indeed I do.

 

Socrates: My opinion is: Truth is absolute, not opinion, and that you, Mr. Protagoras, are absolutely in error. Since this is my opinion, then you must grant that it is true according to your philosophy.

 

Protagoras: You are quite correct, Socrates.

 

Is it true that truths are relative and subjective? If it is objectively true, then at least some things are objective true and relativism is only sometimes true. If it is only subjectively true, then there is no way to argue against a person who doesn’t believe it and who, in fact, asserts just the opposite. How do you argue in defense of the truth of something which, according to you, is only true for you? Forgive the modernization of ancient Greek..but the translation remains consistent to Plato's intent.

Edited April 3, 2012 by Aurielius

[grannywils]

Dang, A...:blink:

[SubjectProphet]

I'm not following with what the thread is based on here. Religion extremes? Advertisement extremes? Just the word "extremes" overall?

[SimpleGlitch]

To answer the OP "Extreme" is new "trigger word." If you have ever had to take a class or seminar about public speaking they may mention something called trigger words that are meant to stir up emotion in people, usually to convince them to do something or (often in the case of the media) hide that the have very little actual substance in their speech.

 

Often when I hear media or people in politics start throwing around words like Extreme, I start looking to see if they are actually backing up their claims with factual evidence. Sadly, they often do not.

 

Other "trigger words" that are used a lot these days are "terrorist", "Good vs Evil" (or good guys vs bad guys and any variations of these), Freedom, and "threatening our way of life".

 

When you hear a lot of these words in the same speech that should start to signal a red flag in your head, someone may be trying to convince you to do something, but they aren't giving you the whole story. Speech is a very powerful tool in the right hands, but when someone tries to hard to appeal to my emotions and not enough to my logic they lose credibly in my mind.

 

"Words have the power to both destroy and heal." -- Gautama Buddha