Reader’s Edition for Second Part: Dear Readers, in First Part of the article I tried to narrate my thoughts about assholic mind, where I hoisted to testify my assholic confusion according familiar and global aspects. I already mentioned it before that I’m yet not sure but Mr. Aaron James and Toad’s Hall could be. Anyway, I think everybody should considerate by his assholic position in society before to judge other as asshole or prick. Self-criticism and justification perhaps applicable for all human tested their mental status first before going to test other’s mind, which I missed in Toad’s Hall and Aaron James wording.
They discussed lot about assholic mind, tried to make definition with allegorical satire and deal with the subject as smart and confident analyzer. That means these two Guys are self-confident to their mental position in society for wording, for justifying and theorizing asshole or prick like swear-words, both aspects of philosophical and psychological point. I enjoyed their wording, their different approaches to philosophize, politicize and socialize such metallic swear-words as valid for serious discussion.
People use swear-words according their thoughts to justify other person’s action. They use the dirty obscene words in many aspects; most of the time people use it to tease or make fun with somebody, sometime uses it to hit somebody, and most often to express their outrages about somebody’s action which they consider harmful preserves their self-interest. The application of any swear-word is multidimensional here by multiple interest and intention. It could be innocently or comically applied to taunt anybody, and applied commodiously denotes the anger rage or discontent about anybody’s action which an individual person or group of people think injurious for their self-satisfaction.
Anybody in society (even the women) could treat as Asshole if the named person inwardly believed that he (and maybe the “she”) deserves other’s attention for the ingrained belief about his Quality, Specialty, Correctness which should be entitled by other.
Swear-words could turn out an individual or group to be anarchic rebellious and violent to keep their self-interest. We could notice this in Middle Eastern crisis, where Arab people divided them two groups and fought to consider each other assholic. Conflict-of-interest already diversified there by civil war between Arabs and intentional players of world powerhouses in the conflict. Civilians considered Jihadist and powerhouses as dreadful assholes to their normal life, whereas Jihadist considered powerhouse-players as assholes and tried to ride on their ass by killing civilians in own territory, or all over the world to take revenge against their foes.
The indication of any swear-words might be the indication of any society and its players who considered them correct and just according their own interest. The objectives of consider other person asshole prick or an assholic-prick motivated by one-sided principle, where mental state intended to show its rigidity against other, where mind is not prepared to consider and compromise its decision to avoid anarchy and unrest. That is the big confusion-game of applying swear-words to anybody. It’s a puzzle where anything could happen by the moment. However, Mr. Toad’s Hall and Aaron James tried to solve the puzzle in their mighty wording and certainly did the job according their own style of philosophical quest.
Aaron James is very details about the subject in his book. He tried to make clear definition of what asshole does mean to the end. His paraphrasing defined the definition with humor and theoretical tune. Aaron separated the term assholes from the dictionary’s definition and clearly alienated assholes to think them a criminal or maybe the psychopath. He also discussed details about public perceptions and uses of the swear-word in general by separating his philosophical attitude about asshole. According Aaron James, there is no reason to believe that asshole means always negative; rather it could funny, humorous and bit negligible due to the action done by the specific person.
Language itself is not moral but it carries the morality of any action that is beneficial or not for the maximum rather be the minimum. That’s why assholic action is paradoxical due to the beneficial advantages, where the utilitarian contradiction beheaded minimum for the sake of maximum’s benefit, but the controversy continued there.
The horrific action of individual person which harm lot such as Hitler, Stalin and many others dreadful activities is not sufficient to treat them asshole. They are maybe mentally disordered patient, should be treated as psychopath or cold-blooded murder, but asshole mean even more than that. Aaron’s analysis is quite interesting and thought-provoking due to his standpoint about the definition of a real asshole, where he goes beyond over the frame we have used to apply mark the person as asshole. Perhaps even I not freed to use the typical punctuation mark in my article at previous. Anyway, me is not important there, if I’m mistaken it is because my perception is yet not clear and hanged on doubt indeed. Aaron could get applaud, because he at least tried to define the assholic matter as clear as possible.
If I say briefly, Aaron James treated a person asshole according his mental state where the person systematically consider himself as morally correct or just that is underestimated by society people he believes. To his definition:
“… a person counts as an asshole when, and only when, he systematically allows himself to enjoy special advantages in interpersonal relations out of an entrenched sense of entitlement that immunizes him against the complaints of other people.”
Aaron classified the definition by triad and that is:
(1) allows himself to enjoy special advantages and does so systematically; (2) does this out of an entrenched sense of entitlement; and (3) is immunized by his sense of entitlement against the complaints of other people.
According Aaron’s details analysis in his book, we could summarize the whole fact under the sentenced enhancement and that is:
Anybody in society (even the women) could treat as Asshole if the named person inwardly believed that he (and maybe the “she”) deserves other’s attention for the ingrained belief about his Quality, Specialty, Correctness which should be entitled by other. The desire of entitlement covered Aaron’s mentioned point 1 and 2, and assuredly that person is asshole if he immunized his sense of attitude that, “I’ll don’t care what other is saying about me or make complaint about me”.
Aaron’s explained each three-point with details and this space is not proper to discuss the chapters as a whole. Readers can find his book in net for further reading or discussion. It is not an easy task to deal with such sensitive and disrelish subject with prolific justification. I enjoyed his attitude to the asshole personality that:
Aaron’s analysis is quite interesting and thought-provoking due to his standpoint about the definition of a real asshole, where he goes beyond over the frame…
1. An asshole could entertain other despite his horrific thought, gesture and comments (as many believed that Trump is now doing it), where folks could enjoy assholic-prick’s words or action by standing on the relic.
2. Assholes could appear a systematic mind-game, where mind reflects the mental state of that self-organized person who think himself correct and superior in intellect than other, which provoked us to think about his surface (where he was born once) and the situation of that surface as a whole.
3. Language is powerful than any instrument we used to express our thoughts, ideas, philosophies and lot before goes to the action. Word cannot take back after delivery. So, words represents our mental state about anything, where others measure the person according their own perception and values.
4. Language itself is not moral but it carries the morality of any action that is beneficial or not for the maximum rather be the minimum. That’s why assholic action is paradoxical due to the beneficial advantages, where the utilitarian contradiction beheaded minimum for the sake of maximum’s benefit, but the controversy continued there.
However, Aaron discussed lot about moral contradiction of an assholic action and tried to debunk the puzzle by his analytical wording, despite this, my confused-state yet not omitted. It would be more pleasant for me if he hit the nail on self-desired interest of humankind that could make the person dialectical and aggressive to his action, that maybe the root-cause of making a man (be the woman) as Assholic. Aaron not discussed, does Toad’s discussed on it? Readers, we will search the answer in next part.
Previous Part Link: Swear–words and Assholic Mind (First Part) ⇒ Kirno Sohochari