The starting point for my reflections about the word violence comes perhaps unexpected. In his book Kindly Inquisitors, the journalist and philosopher Jonathan Rauch outlines a radical defense of free inquiry against all forms of censorship, whether traditionally authoritarian or rooted in the modern notion of political correctness. This defense of free inquiry leads him to oppose all possible restrictions on verbal expression. In a chapter entitled The Humanitarian Threat he reviews measures, proposed and devised, against assaultive speech, quoting a professor who had stated To me, racial epithets are not speech. They are bullets. Rauch's reaction is eloquent and uncompromising: you do not have to be Kant to see what comes after 'offensive words are bullets': if you hurt me with words, I reply with bullets, and the exchange is even. (Rauch 1993: 131) Earlier in the book, Rauch characterizes the views he rejects as a theory which said that images and expressions and words could be, for all practical purposes, a form of hurt or violence. (Rauch 1993: 18). © 2009 Springer-Verlag New York.
CITATION STYLE
Spierenburg, P. (2008). Violence: Reflections about a word. In Violence in Europe: Historical and Contemporary Perspectives (pp. 13–25). Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09705-3_2
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.