Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Libramarian" data-source="post: 7176641" data-attributes="member: 6688858">This is going way beyond D&amp;D, but about the verb &quot;other&quot;, since it appeared earlier in the thread:To me this is a debasement of the original concept from phenomenological philosophy. Some philosophers in fact consider radical Otherness the foundation of the ethical relation (&quot;ethics precedes ontology&quot;). I.e. to relate to someone ethically means in fact to consider them in their naked otherness, and emphatically not to immediately assimilate them into some schema of yours. This seems to me a far more profound idea than &quot;othering&quot; meaning basically the same thing as acting snobbishly aloof. It also seems a powerful critique of the &quot;golden rule&quot; -- I don't know that what's right for me is right for you.Forcibly removing Native American children from their families and placing them in residential schools to ensure transmission of white/European culture is generally considered now to have been deeply unethical. But that's exactly what we might justify doing so as not to &quot;other&quot; them.&quot;I accept and I confess before God and you, our failures in the residential schools. We failed you. We failed ourselves. We failed God.

I am sorry, more than I can say, that we were part of a system which took you and your children from home and family.

I am sorry, more than I can say, that we tried to remake you in our image, taking from you your language and the signs of your identity.&quot;- Archbishop Michael Peers, A Step Along the PathI do think there are parallels with a culture that expects women to have hard bodies, be ambitious in their careers, have emotionless casual sex, etc.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Libramarian, post: 7176641, member: 6688858"] This is going way beyond D&D, but about the verb "other", since it appeared earlier in the thread: To me this is a debasement of the original concept from phenomenological philosophy. Some philosophers in fact consider radical Otherness the foundation of the ethical relation ("ethics precedes ontology"). I.e. to relate to someone ethically means in fact to consider them in their naked otherness, and emphatically not to immediately assimilate them into some schema of yours. This seems to me a far more profound idea than "othering" meaning basically the same thing as acting snobbishly aloof. It also seems a powerful critique of the "golden rule" -- I don't know that what's right for me is right for you. Forcibly removing Native American children from their families and placing them in residential schools to ensure transmission of white/European culture is generally considered now to have been deeply unethical. But that's exactly what we might justify doing so as not to "other" them. [INDENT]"I accept and I confess before God and you, our failures in the residential schools. We failed you. We failed ourselves. We failed God. I am sorry, more than I can say, that we were part of a system which took you and your children from home and family. I am sorry, more than I can say, that [B]we tried to remake you in our image[/B], taking from you your language and the signs of your identity."[/INDENT] - Archbishop Michael Peers, [I]A Step Along the Path[/I] I do think there are parallels with a culture that expects women to have hard bodies, be ambitious in their careers, have emotionless casual sex, etc. [/QUOTE]

Verification