Rude Inquiry: Should Philosophy Be More Polite?

Rude Inquiry:Should Philosophy Be More Polite? Alice MacLachlan (bio) introduction Should philosophers be more polite to one another? The topic of good manners—or, grandly, civility—has enjoyed a recent renaissance in philosophical circles (Buss 1999; Calhoun 2000; Burrow 2010; Westacott 2011; Stohr 2012; Reiheld 2013; Zerilli 2014; Olberding 2019), but little the formal discussion has been self-directed: that is, it not examined virtues and vices impolite philosophizing, particular. This is an oversight; practices rudeness do rather lot work enacting distinctly (analytic) modes engagement, ways both shape detract from aims our discipline. If we fail recognize rudeness, become vulnerable some their conflating effects, miss capacity chill exclude. Despite these dangers, there are reasons embrace abolition on its own merits for risks inherent any abolitionist project. My argument proceeds four stages. First, I provide analysis detailing complex relationship disrespect. Second, identify three varieties consider extent which they intrinsic or extrinsic practices. In final two sections, case against highlighting variable value—and conclude with modest proposals regulation.1 1. what's wrong rudeness? ordinary discourse, rude often understood uncouth unmannered, either ignorant unmoved by finer social graces—that flout way things ought done, so [End Page 175] as them. Even etymology "rude" heavy elitism; origins trace back Latin words rudis, meaning unwrought unrefined, rudus, lump broken stone. To polite, other hand, polished, made smooth (politus). A person boor, term originates 16th century Dutch low German peasant. Other synonyms "rude"—e.g. uncouth, uncivilized, barbaric—are basically different describing outsider: someone who us. Oxford English Dictionary prioritizes "lack knowledge education" culture refinement; roughness life habit; uncouthness" definitions while "a discourtesy; ill-mannered act utterance" civility courtesy; bad manners" listed fourth fifth, respectively ("Rudeness, n" 2019). While people know employ niceties, speak frankly, directly, convention. politeness merely attention etiquette, etiquette system norms maintaining insider outsider status given context, then at worst morally neutral and, potentially, praiseworthy egalitarian perspective. Yet understanding simple violations convention—call this Faux Pas account—risks undermoralizing costs rudeness. There times when someone's behavior wrong—that harmful, disrespectful, unkind; hurts another person's feelings leaves them feeling excluded uncared for—and best describe wrongfulness noting perpetrator behaved rudely. When "etiquette" mentioned, most people's minds go immediately dinners complicated ordering forks knives: conventions test whether dinner guest appropriate upbringing. But daily full subtler whose purposes include cooperation coordination, well expression respect goodwill: attitudes actions make shared easier agreeable. We nod hello, use right pronouns, offer seat. Some designed explicitly than exclude: example, discourage smoking without first checking, "do you mind if smoke?" those rule out racist sexist jokes. Ronni Gura Sadovsky's identifies sub-genre political primary aim express for...