AndyWood comments on The Nature of Offense - Less Wrong

86 Post author: Wei_Dai 23 July 2009 11:15AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (173)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: AndyWood 23 July 2009 07:12:19PM 1 point [-]

I think this is the most useful way of framing the situation yet. I now realize that the things to which I took the most "offense" were what I interpreted as gambits being made, control being sought, etc. Status grabs.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 August 2009 08:14:40PM 0 points [-]

I'd put it this way: offense is given by someone who violates a social norm the offended rely on to justify or enforce their status claims. This principle excludes the variety of status claims that don't give rise to offense. It explains why obscenity and profanity offend some people — those who assert superiority by obtaining deferential and proper speech from others. It also explains why the reaction is punitive: it's the way social norms generally are enforced. I expand on this position (in a legal-writing context) in a blog entry "Formula and Formality": http://tinyurl.com/mr7xf6

Stephen R. Diamond http://disputedissues.blogspot.com

Comment author: [deleted] 05 August 2009 07:44:46PM 0 points [-]

I think I stated the governing principle accurately here. It accounts for all the countexamples mentioned (although my account predates this discussion). Others must disagree; I wonder why?