<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Pragmatism: Pregnant Drug Use, Economic Policy, And Profanity</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rationalphilosophy.net/index.php/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rationalphilosophy.net/index.php/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity.html</link>
	<description>Using philosophy, reason and logic in life, to find meaning, purpose and peace.</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 08:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Martin Walker</title>
		<link>http://rationalphilosophy.net/index.php/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity.html#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 11:33:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rationalphilosophy.net/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity/#comment-36</guid>
		<description>Hello again, Valerie.

Yes, I think about this, too, with respect to what's acceptable clothing or behavior or topics of conversation -- the social rules. Those who reel at the change may argue that just because we become inured to a word or the sight of a pierced tongue doesn't mean that they're not inherently bad or unacceptable. But, as you point out, so much of what we think and feel is conditioned by our experience and what we've come to regard as normal.

Best wishes,
Martin</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello again, Valerie.</p>
<p>Yes, I think about this, too, with respect to what&#8217;s acceptable clothing or behavior or topics of conversation &#8212; the social rules. Those who reel at the change may argue that just because we become inured to a word or the sight of a pierced tongue doesn&#8217;t mean that they&#8217;re not inherently bad or unacceptable. But, as you point out, so much of what we think and feel is conditioned by our experience and what we&#8217;ve come to regard as normal.</p>
<p>Best wishes,<br />
Martin</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Valerie</title>
		<link>http://rationalphilosophy.net/index.php/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity.html#comment-35</link>
		<dc:creator>Valerie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rationalphilosophy.net/main/pragmatism-pregnant-drug-use-economic-policy-and-profanity/#comment-35</guid>
		<description>Hi.  It's me again, not being able to get off the conditioning bandwagon.  Having said (or rather written) that, I agree with everything you've said. I can remember when the word "damn" was bleeped on television.  Now, it doesn't have any meaning.  The word outside of its context is just a sound.  The same with "fuck."  

I work with Vietnamese children born in the West.  They often use the word fuck.  When a Westerner hears it, they shudder.  When their parents hear it, they don't blink.  Why?  It has no meaning to them.  It is just a sound.  And ... isn't that all any words are?  Just sound.  It is the meaning that we give it, our perception of it, based on  our conditioning.  Therefore, 550,000 people perceive it one way (likely more, but only those people took the time to complain), and many others perceive it differently.

The Washington Post wrote an article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/04/AR2006120401286_pf.html) on swear words.  It appears that in Quebec the most shocking swear words are related to the Catholic Church, while in the rest of Canada the very worst word that can be uttered is the slang of a female body part.  So, what is taboo in one culture is not so much in another, based on the conditioning of the culture.  

I wonâ€™t bore you with any more; just wanted to respond with the thought.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi.  It&#8217;s me again, not being able to get off the conditioning bandwagon.  Having said (or rather written) that, I agree with everything you&#8217;ve said. I can remember when the word &#8220;damn&#8221; was bleeped on television.  Now, it doesn&#8217;t have any meaning.  The word outside of its context is just a sound.  The same with &#8220;fuck.&#8221;  </p>
<p>I work with Vietnamese children born in the West.  They often use the word fuck.  When a Westerner hears it, they shudder.  When their parents hear it, they don&#8217;t blink.  Why?  It has no meaning to them.  It is just a sound.  And &#8230; isn&#8217;t that all any words are?  Just sound.  It is the meaning that we give it, our perception of it, based on  our conditioning.  Therefore, 550,000 people perceive it one way (likely more, but only those people took the time to complain), and many others perceive it differently.</p>
<p>The Washington Post wrote an article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/04/AR2006120401286_pf.html) on swear words.  It appears that in Quebec the most shocking swear words are related to the Catholic Church, while in the rest of Canada the very worst word that can be uttered is the slang of a female body part.  So, what is taboo in one culture is not so much in another, based on the conditioning of the culture.  </p>
<p>I wonâ€™t bore you with any more; just wanted to respond with the thought.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

