Deck 11: Tully Borland and Megan Hyska, “Political Correctness”

Question 1

In his essay, Tully Borland discusses what he takes to be the importance of language. He says:
Let us recall that language is a precious gift … Though sometimes used for evil, it is also a source of good. Thus, as with other goods, we should want as few restrictions upon it as possible.
Borland is trying to set the default here. He's trying to say that the burden of proof is on the person who wants to restrict language, rather than on the person who wants unrestricted speech. Would Hyska disagree? Why or why not? And if not, then what would she want to add to Borland's point?

Answer 1

Demonstrate understanding of the views of both authors
Offer a reasonable interpretation of Borland's point such that it's plausible that Hyska would disagree, explaining why, or offer a reasonable interpretation of Borland's point such that it's plausible that Hyska would not disagree, again explaining why

Question 2

In her essay, Megan Hyska responds to the worry that changing language to reflect collective ideals makes it impossible to articulate disagreement. She writes:
Some will suggest that changing language to reflect our collective ideals is fine, but that we should wait until after some widespread agreement about these ideals is reached before we do so. Otherwise, goes the worry, aren't we depriving dissidents of the raw linguistic materials needed to articulate their position…? The answer is no, we aren't. It just isn't the case that PC linguistic changes make it impossible to articulate a position in disagreement with the egalitarian norms that they serve. A person can still express general racial animosity without the use of a slur … and can still dispute the proper treatment of trans people while using the phrase "transgender" rather than the aforementioned non-synonymous alternatives.
In your essay, evaluate Hyska's claim. Then, try to come up with an example that would count as evidence against her view, using it as the basis for an objection to the position that she outlines here. Then, consider how Hyska might respond.

Answer 2

Explain and evaluate Hyska's claim about the possibility of expressing disagreement even when language reflects collective ideals
Offer an original example that presents a challenge to the argument that Hysa develops
Explain how Hyska might respond to this objection

Question 3

In his reply, Tully Borland suggests that "PC-speech codes are like book burnings." Explain what he means by that. Then, describe the extent to which you believe that we as a society should be worried about the kind of problem that Borland has in mind. Finally, defend or object to this claim: politically correct speech is like book burning, and we ought to object to it.

Answer 3

Explain Borland's understanding of PC-speech codes being like book burnings, drawing from the reply itself
Explain the extent to which the author is concerned with the kind of restriction on freedom that Borland is concerned about
Develop an argument either defending or objecting to the claim "politically correct speech is like book burning, and we ought to object to it"

Question 4

In his essay, Borland affirms that political correctness originated in what political context?

A) Napoleon Bonaparte's empire
B) Mao Tse-Tung's communist party
C) Nazi Germany
D) The American Civil War

Question 5

In his essay, Borland introduces the concept of "Orwellian Speech." Which of the following is NOT a characteristic of Orwellian Speech?

A) The purpose is thought-manipulation
B) The rules stay the same for an extended period
C) It distorts the truth by saying the opposite
D) It introduces a new euphemism into the language

Question 6

In his essay, Borland argues that, in a liberal democracy, one should be against _____:

A) Microagressions
B) Thrasymachus's view of justice
C) De facto discrimination
D) Hate speech codes

Question 7

In her essay, Hyska suggests that those things that get called "politically correct" are attempts at what?

A) A reformation of norms
B) Radical Islamic terror
C) Conscientious democracy building
D) Orwellian speech

Question 8

In her essay, Hyska responds to a number of objections against her view. Which of the following is NOT one of those objections?

A) Egalitarianism as mind control
B) Egalitarianism as unnecessary
C) Political correctness as mind control
D) Political correctness as petty tyranny

Question 9

In her essay, Hyska affirms that the phrase "forced busing" is an example of what?

A) Politically correct speech
B) Fear-mongering
C) Animosity toward the left
D) A political dogwhistle

Question 10

In his reply, Borland suggests that political correctness speech codes are like what act?

A) Tweeting against safe-spaces
B) Picketing
C) Democratic election
D) Book burning

Question 11

In her reply, Hyska argues that a commitment to freedom of speech requires _____:

A) Rejecting inorganic speech innovations
B) Openness to language change
C) Enforcing "bottom-up" linguistic change
D) A full-fledged endorsement of speech-policing

Question 12

In her essay, Hyska says, "although the term often known as political correctness is a positive one, the phenomenon "political correctness" has come to be used in a way that does our democracy a profound disservice."

Question 13

Which author concludes their essay by saying, "While the expression 'politically correct' feels like a convenient shorthand for a kind of norm change that is a disorienting aspect of contemporary life, its use is now an investment in an apparatus that mainly functions to obscure and polarize the political landscape."

A) Tully Borland
B) Megan Hyska