Restoring Discrimination

It pains me when someone of a usually uncritical sentiment off-handedly speaks against discrimination in a manner that confuses the ability to discriminate with human stupidity. If legislation has its way, the fatuous-minded would do away with discrimination altogether, so as not to have to waste the precious brain power involved in discriminating between the two. But in a time when blurred lines, group think and conformism are the modus operandi of the general public, maybe discrimination is needed most of all.

You are confused, of course. You might have thought I'd be advocating for racism and bigotry, instead of discernment and judgement. Confusing, yes? Don't mind me. I am advocating against the poor use of the word "discrimination" in modern times throughout the world, which appears to have adopted the American usage—that is, the faulty usage—over its original. Nonetheless, despite its pejorative quality nowadays, the word still is and always has been synonymous with discernment, perception and acumen, qualities in which racism and bigotry have no place.

From one philologist and defender of words to the next, dear comrade, let's be careful to take an adversarial and consequently lonely position against the notion that discrimination is a form of human folly which leads to bigotry and stupidity, and rescue our precious commodity from those who simply do not care otherwise, but who no less shape our language and culture through their careless misuse.

We know that infants learn to recognize a distinction between one object and another not long after birth. Object perception is a core human faculty, and as such, the ability to discriminate is a biological human imperative that should not be slandered nor blamed for willy-nilly irrationality and ignorance. We do ourselves a great injustice by equating discrimination with injustice.

To develop false notions about an individual while utilizing invalid units of measure such as skin-color, gender or status, and condemning or fearing according to these quite arbitrary and fleeting distinctions is a complete lack of discrimination rather than an instance of it. Too be sure, the way one might identify with these strictly categorical, and thus, imaginary distinctions, or how one might throw himself and others into these indistinct and fuzzy groups, thereby implying a very real commonality between himself and a vast amount of people he has never met, is to negate discrimination altogether. Racism, bigotry, and intolerance is to be indiscriminate in one's generalizations and vapid associations, which arrises as the refusal to draw a distinction between one human being and the next, but to toss them wholesale into a box as if we were products of some grand and superficial assembly line in one's imagination.

I assure you, friend, categorical distinctions are dependent of human minds and dictionaries, and do not hold any concrete place in space and time. So-called discrimination against one categorical distinction over another, whether it be race or sexuality, is to fully admit one's inability to discriminate between fantasy and reality. Unless one is omniscient enough to account for every single particular of every single universal, any certainty derived from categorical generalizations is in direct proportion to what he doesn't know, to his ignorance.

Furthermore, one cannot discriminate against things, one can only discriminate between them. To reserve one opinion for every single particular of a category, against all people of a certain shade of skin or a sex that involves more variables than simple biology or appearance, is to be immediately wrong. No deductive nor inductive method can verify such boneheadedness. If one was able to discriminate between one individual and another, he might find that learning about her is more reasonable than assuming he already knows her. His fault here is not discrimination, but generalization, which is a more useful term for these sorts of cases.

Let's refuse the equating of discrimination with indiscriminateness and generalization, which is the true cause of the haphazard, careless and sweeping intolerance. Let's equate racism and bigotry to stupidity rather than intelligence. Let's use a different word.

Thank you for reading,

LesMis

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

A little on the wordy side. LOL.

Simply stated, discrimination is a human attribute.

Prejudice is a human failing.

So basically you're saying we need to restore discernment? Or that we need to restore the original definition of discrimination?

Why not just use the word discernment instead of complaining about a certain culture having a different definition for it? It would save a lot of time and semantics I think.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

There is an art to writing eloquently and that art embodies creating a message that is more than the sum of its parts. I think Misanthrope did a quite excellent job.

Cheers - Dave

a reply to: nwtrucker

Maybe you can compress it into a tweet for me.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

From one philologist and defender of words to the next, dear comrade, let's be careful to take an adversarial and consequently lonely position against the notion that discrimination is a form of human folly which leads to bigotry and stupidity, and rescue our precious commodity from those who simply do not care otherwise, but who no less shape our language and culture through their careless misuse.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

my conclusion is that you are once again bored.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Prejudice is a human failing.

I'm not so sure.
It may be a defense mechanism.

Its very late/early here so maybe thats the reason I had trouble following what you said but to be honest I think it was just the abundant use of big words LOL.

Not sure if this is on topic or not due to my lack of understanding of what your on about but I had an interesting discussion tonight with a few people about discrimination and racism, girl 1 said she didnt see colour when dealing with people, I thought it was a nice sentiment until girl 2 chimed in that that outlook is both ignorant and racist.
In her opinion to deny people their race is almost like saying you are willing to overlook a flaw, whats so wrong with being Black or Asian or White that you have to ignore it?

Sorry if Its not on topic or silly, Im not as clever or eloquent as you

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

LOL.

I have a friend that is a publisher I can put you in contact with....

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

Now that's a viewpoint I hadn't considered before.

I thank you for that..

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: nwtrucker

Maybe you can compress it into a tweet for me.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

Now that's a viewpoint I hadn't considered before.

I thank you for that..

I know!!!

Blew my mind as well, very insightful young lady.
Having dinner with her tomorrow and if she comes out with any other pearls of wisdom Ill make sure to share them

a reply to: butcherguy

One could put a 'defense mechanism' into the same category as a 'human failing' as well?

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
Its very late/early here so maybe thats the reason I had trouble following what you said but to be honest I think it was just the abundant use of big words LOL.

Not sure if this is on topic or not due to my lack of understanding of what your on about but I had an interesting discussion tonight with a few people about discrimination and racism, girl 1 said she didnt see colour when dealing with people, I thought it was a nice sentiment until girl 2 chimed in that that outlook is both ignorant and racist.
To deny people their race is almost like saying you are willing to overlook a flaw in her opinion, whats wrong with being Black or Asian or White that you have to ignore it?

Sorry if Its not on topic or silly, Im not as clever or eloquent as you

"you are ignorant and racist for ignoring the fact that im black"

you cant win with some people. then again, maybe that chick was just looking for some cheap sympathy.

originally posted by: nwtrucker
a reply to: butcherguy

One could put a 'defense mechanism' into the same category as a 'human failing' as well?

In an evolutionary sense, a defense mechanism would not be a failing. It would tend to keep our young alive until after they reproduce.

a reply to: TzarChasm

my conclusion is that you are once again bored.

Fair conclusion.

a reply to: butcherguy

I'd re-phrase it 'could' rather than 'would'.

A defense mechanism could include " lock and load, kill em all and let God sort em out". That one could ensure many do NOT get to the reproductive age.

But, I do get your point.

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

I like to use little words as well.

If one doesn't see that another's skin is a certain shade, then I might have to call them blind. However, identifying oneself and others with a race or skin color because it supposedly encapsulates something more than skin color, is in my mind equally as blind.

Girl 1 and 2 are both wrong.