Re: This is a test
Al Geist wrote:
With that said, I'm done with this thread.
But the thread isn't officially over until it fulfills Godwin's Law!
Given how it's gone so far, I'll let you do the honors, if you wish.
It's not that much of a stretch from equating the good-natured poking of
fun with hatred and racism.
In this case, I think the thread was already thwarted by the invocation of the more general rule of _Devil's Advocacy Defense_, which is well known in anonymous public discussion communities as an insubstantial excuse of last resort when used as an explanation for untenable positions held in a contentious discussion. A typical invocation of this defense would be made by a contender attempting to disclaim or distance him/herself from an unsubstantiated claim s/he made earlier in the discussion. The most common form of this defense, when made to disclaim a racial slur, is of the form "I don't believe the Elbonians have a shoddy methodology myself, I was just throwing it out there to stir things up."
In the notorious Friday Funnies case that gave rise to this thread, the claim, that the cause of humor precludes any reasonable interpretation of the joke as racially demeaning, is in effect the invocation of Devil's Advocacy, with humor taking the role of "stirring things up" in the above example. The invoker loses three points (the second for implying that California is a funny state, and the third for implying that casinos are not funny).
A more substantial defense would have been to invoke the rule of _Plausible Deniability_ by asserting that any perceived pejorative content in the joke resided in the head of the recipient of the joke, and was not implied or made explicit in the joke itself. Indeed, this defense has roots in cognitive and humor theory, and is much tougher to debunk. With Plausible Deniability, the joke's meaning is cast as the reader or listener's responsibility--they have to "get it" as humor, by considering and rejecting any contending "not funny" meanings. In the context of humor, it is plausible to claim that any "not funny" message was not intended and need not be considered. But this excuse is not funny, and has a dampening effect that ultimately runs the risk of terminating the contentious discussion in a stalemated draw, unless one of the contenders has failed to make a substantial case, in which case that contender loses the point.
Obligatory disclaimer: This message is 100% free of authoritative citations. I know it, but am a compulsive arbiter. I should have pointed this out earlier, but in any case you should have known it already.
Ned Bedinger
doc -at- edwordsmith -dot- com
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
WebWorks ePublisher Pro for Word features support for every major Help format plus PDF, HTML and more. Flexible, precise, and efficient content delivery. Try it today! http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
Easily create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to any popular Help file format or printed documentation. Learn more at http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- infoinfocus -dot- com -dot-
To unsubscribe send a blank email to techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40infoinfocus.com
To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
Follow-Ups:
- Re: This is a test, Gene Kim-Eng
- RE: This is a test, James Barrow
References:
RE: This is a test: From: Combs, Richard
Previous by Author:
Re: FRIDAY FUN: Snow day!
Next by Author:
Re: How we define ourselves
Previous by Thread:
RE: This is a test
Next by Thread:
Re: This is a test
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine
Visit TechWhirl's Other Sites
Sponsored Ads