10

We hold these truths to be self-evident - That all *men* are created equal...

Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 10 months ago to Philosophy
108 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

At the beginning of many legal contracts is a section that deals with 'customary definitions of terms'. This thread is a spin-off of nsnelson's post on racism, which caused me to recall that there was a tacit understanding that "men" in the Declaration of Independence meant 'free white males'. But there are other definitions of the word "men" and it might have been cleaner simply to redefine that word in the Constitution as opposed to adding amendments.

Obviously, one of the potential definitions is that "men" means "males of all races". But another definition provides the turning point of the Lord of the Rings, is a crucial twist in the Celtic poem Battle of Clontarf, and is present in traditional liturgical texts, eg "man does not live by bread alone". That second definition is that "man" means "mankind".

Should we just reclaim the words "man" and "men" to mean "person" and dispense with specific racial and genderic laws and regulations?

Jan

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 5.
  • Posted by freedomforall 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I promise to fix that for you, Mamaemma.

    Just elect me Emperor freedomforall. I'm running on the GOP ticket but I really mean what I say. ^;)

    (Donny Trump would make a great vice emperor, except I doubt I would survive his assassination attempt just after the coronation.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 10 months ago
    you can't use person it's sexist. check the last three letters.Ditto human. you can use homonid or Terrans but hose damn sexist words are verboten!!!

    Check your PC Gestapo manual
    Reply | Permalink  
  • 13
    Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 10 months ago
    O Lord, I would love to go back to the original meaning. I was taught in grade school that the literary "man" meant both man and woman.

    I am so tired of all the politically correct speech!!!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree with your stance - it is a strong one. The Founding Fathers pretty certainly (from what I have read - tell me if I am wrong) meant 'white males' and/or 'white males of property'. I am pointing out that the Emancipation Proclamation was redundant, as are all the subsequent racial and gender based regulations: all you need to do is specify that "men" in the governing documents means "people".

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That is a diverting thought, CG: The Declaration of Independence as a prototype of government.

    I like that idea.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 10 months ago
    I suspect they weren't thinking that much about it. It's like working on a prototype, where you're just focused on getting the thing working. You know at some point it will have be made safe, reliable, manfacturable, testable, and be made from parts available in production quantities. But at the early stage, you're just trying to prove the concept.

    Following this model, they key innovation was a real working democratic republic where power flows from the citizens to the gov't, not the other way around.

    In my own language, I use "people" and "humankind" instead "men" and "mankind" because they don't invite confusion about where I literally mean males or people in general.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by SaltyDog 9 years, 10 months ago
    Frankly, I've never had a contextual problem with the word. If we're using your example of "all men are created equal", I take that to mean all of mankind are created equal. I have never confused that with the men's room. I feel that those who use the narrow definition are willfully ignorant, and those who want to overturn our vocabulary are just as bad...seemingly, just wanting something to complain about. If in fact we were to change our vocabulary, making it somehow entirely gender neutral, it would achieve exactly nothing.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo