Long: skip if not interested
loftar wrote:
I may be turning paranoid, but I cannot help but wonder if it isn't thanks to some post-modernistic twist, like 'It's just my own personal volition that I don't, hence I say "won't"; to say that I "shan't" would imply that there are some objective standards of conduct by which I could abide, which obviously cannot be true. Heck, I'm no racist!' ;P
I would strongly agree with this, that the loss of the word shall in the English language is a linguistic evolution triggered by a cultural evolution. You could argue that the sibilant sh sound being harder to pronounce clearly and to hear easily was ripe for modification. However what little I've read about history indicates to me that a century ago obedience, duty and other virtues like this were paramount whereas now they are secondary at best. In the 1800's I'm sure a defense against excessive brutality could be automatically defended by citing "obedience to orders" whereas nowadays soldiers are being taught to consider their officers orders in light of the articles of war and are required to refuse to obey them. (How well this works in practice is another story.)
You can find numerous examples of similar changes where authority is not automatically recognized. Children for example used to be taught to be "respectful to their elders and betters". Now they are taught "not to talk to strangers" and it would be a tricky concept to try to explain to a six year old who a "better" was. It used to be a concept that needed no explaining.
As a culture we no longer agree on a objective standards of conduct the same way our recent ancestors did. Put you in a debate with a lawyer from 1810 and the basic assumptions behind both your reasoning would differ immensely. He would likely argue that there was no possible way that you could use your own judgment, that it would never be remotely as sound as the collective judgment of the divines, jurists and masters who had come up with these standards of conduct. Your belief that you have even the ghost of a chance of making these judgments would be put down to the lack of a specific virtue in you: Humility. He would likely explain the circular nature of your delusion: Who says you, of all people, are wise enough to decide for yourself? You do! Whereas your side of the argument might be: Who says I should obey authority? The authorities do!
But what puzzles me is your reference to not being a racist. I don't know where evaluations of race entered into your thoughts.
by kazgar » Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:44 pm 
