By guest author Markus Fischer
"Language creates awareness", "Words shape reality", "Terms can hurt" – according to the proponents of language hygiene. They plead for more esteem, respect and equality in society. That sounds reasonable and desirable. Why not just learn a few gender-neutral pronouns and forgo some terms? It's not that simple. The matter is more complicated than it seems at first glance.
Are social values such as equality, respect and appreciation promoted by the rules of a "new language", as the proponents of language hygiene claim? Or are thoughts and language not rather, as the critics claim, an expression (and not the cause) of a changed awareness of values?
The heated dispute is an expression of a deeper conflict in modern societies. A constructive dialogue requires the ability to reflect, empathy, clarity and goodwill. That seems self-evident – but it is not. The language hygiene that has been prescribed for several years often does not do justice to the self-proclaimed values.
Attitude is (almost) everything
From birth to adulthood, people go through a profound emotional, social and spiritual development, which can be divided into five phases in a very simplified chronological order: egocentric, conformist, rational, pluralistic and integral. Each phase of development is right and important in itself – and yet later levels are better than earlier ones, in the sense that they are more comprehensive, more empathetic, more reasonable or, to put it in the old-fashioned way, more mature. Healthy adults go through every phase in principle, but not everyone ends up on an integral level. People form a focus on or around one of the levels and this leads to very different worldviews and values. They form the unconscious foundation of our thinking, feeling and acting.
Bright and dark sides of development
Each of these levels has its achievements and qualities, but also its downsides. A healthy ego is essential for survival, adult egoism is often destructive. Conformity promotes social cohesion, but it can also suppress freedom and individuality. Rationality protects us from conformist dogmas, but it can also lead to the devaluation of "irrational" feelings. Pluralistic tolerance, equality and harmony are important values in a global world. But unreflected tolerance and false harmony can hinder a necessary debate and demarcation. We need to understand and acknowledge the achievements and failures of each stage of development in order to arrive at a balanced, integral attitude.
What language hygiene would you like?
In the discussion about language hygiene, one always argues against the background of values. This attitude determines the deeper motivation behind the arguments. One can advocate or reject speech hygiene from an egocentric attitude. The argumentation is actually: "I talk as I want and don't let anyone forbid or dictate anything to me!". So this is not about whether someone could be protected or hurt by words – it is about the egocentric enforcement of one's own point of view. The conformist attitude, on the other hand, is motivated by fear of recognition and belonging to one's own community. One's own, egocentric desires have to take a back seat. This attitude says: "What the majority wants is more important than what I want." A rational value attitude often tries to decide the argumentation for or against language hygiene on the basis of scientific studies. Since it is a question of social values, the natural sciences are probably the wrong contact for it.
The public discussion is usually conducted from an (apparently) pluralistic worldview. Pluralism develops important values such as equality, tolerance and appreciation. A dark side of pluralism, however, is that it represents values in a new dogmatics. An attitude of equality becomes an unreflected "All people are always and everywhere the same". The desire for an appreciative dialogue turns into the unrealistic idea of wanting to avoid any evaluation or injury through a "new language".
A new language that doesn't hurt?
These pluralistic claims cannot be maintained consistently. We can and should accord equal human dignity to all people, but individual and cultural differences in abilities, preferences or values remain and must be taken into account. Complete equality is not only impossible, but also unreasonable. To put it provocatively: Whoever wants to invite everyone to the party cannot rule out the suicide bomber.
The pluralistic hope of avoiding emotional injuries through language is also doomed to failure. Emotions are subjective, context-dependent and, above all, "self-made". Feelings arise from the subjective evaluation of stimuli by our organism. This rating is subject to change and varies from person to person. "You victim" can be a nasty insult or a youthful greeting, it depends on the circumstances and the evaluation.
Self-responsibility and empathy instead of language hygiene
There are no emotionally secure, "non-hurtful" words. A pluralistically insecure language hygiene projects its own fears and insecurity outwards, blames others for one's own feelings and then demands "safe words" to protect oneself. This certainty is illusory. A (self-centered) attitude that wants to hurt will achieve this with or without words. You can also hurt unintentionally out of a benevolent intention. Then all that remains is to ask for forgiveness as a sign of sincere empathy.
Needless to say, this is not an excuse for deliberately hurtful or criminal behavior. We can and should legislate on the worst linguistic excesses, but these must remain justified exceptions. The comments on social media channels are full of derogatory and racist statements. You can't master them by prescribing a politically correct language (neither do women ;o). The only thing that can help here is a good upbringing, education and, where that has failed, the judiciary.
The integrative attitude in the discussion about language hygiene is much more important than the question of whether "language creates awareness" or vice versa. The dispute over language rules must take place in a free climate. Compassion, love and tolerance have never allowed themselves to be prescribed by prohibitions or rules. We can learn to take on more responsibility, develop more empathy and better understand our humanity. And to live what "language hygiene" is supposed to be about: the humanity that unites us all.
Recommended reading:
Markus Fischer:
The new Nonviolent communication
Empathy and personal responsibility without self-censorship
1st edition BusinessVillage 2019
232 pages
ISBN 978-3-86980-468-2
24,95 Euro
Order here: BusinessVillage or Amazon
Read Also:
If you would like to learn more about specific training opportunities with Arno Fischbacher, make an appointment here free information talk.
Leave a Comment