1. Horn is arguing for an account of slurs that locates its power in its meaning. By meaning, we are referring to intrinsic properties of the word itself. This is to say that the nature of slurs being derogatory is not primarily due to the context of the speaker but some actual force or institution that is inherit to the word itself which makes it derogatory.
2. Camp argues on grounds of perspectivism. Camp states that usage of a slur is to take on a certain kind of attitude that reflects the derogatory sentiment that usage of a slur implies. To make a claim that uses a slur is not merely based in truth or falsity but the making of the claim and agreement with it depends on the perspective one has in the matter.
3. I tend to lean towards Horn's semantic account of slurs, because it actually seems to provide a general framework for how words have meaning. To say that the derogatory nature is intrinsic in the way Horn describes is not to imply that words or slurs have some natural meaning but that the words come to have meaning is through some force or relationship. In the cases of slurs, the derogatory nature lies not in an individual's hateful attitudes but rather the word's power comes to exist as something derogatory in nature as it exists as part of a derogatory force or structure.
No comments:
Post a Comment