>
> And this is where Jerry's argument fails: he declares that X is
> "pointless" based on his own perspective, and then does not consider the
> possibility that X could have some positive social effects that he
> didn't anticipate. --
I can answer the rest of this later. But where did I ever say that this or that was "pointless"? I say that some things are wrong, bad, or unethical. I point to the analysis of Shelley and question it. I know that Shelley's "Defence of Poetry" was misused and I point out how.
Either you accept that some institutions have bad social effects or you don't. If you don't then say so. If you do then fight them. I assume that in your own way you try to fight them. You can't just say well, everything is equal, and I can't prove anything so I will do nothing.
No matter what you think of the personalities themselves, there is a difference between say an Edward Teller, who tries to help the powerful and tries to keep his reasons for doing so away from the rest of us, and a Leo Szilard, who tries to explain physics to the rest of us and tries to help people to realize that they must mobilize to help save the world. There is a real ethical difference, and part of that difference is how they speak, why they speak, and who they speak to and where. this is an ethics of rhetoric, and it is part of what people do.
Such choices are part of our responsibility as privileged intellectuals and a choice to try to speak to people in a way that they may understand, is also part of that choice. If you wish to defend Teller against Szilard for instance, go ahead. I am sure that is not what you are saying, but these small examples show a difference. It is not an absolute difference, and you will not always be right in your choices. But there is a responsibility to try, to fight against exclusivity and elitism, even in the way we _use_ language.
Jerry Monaco
P.S. Language and Language Use: By the way I don't think that there are _specialized languages_, except for formal languages, and dead languages, etc. But there are specialized lexicons, and specialized _uses_ of language. A minor distinction but an important one for me. Thus I would try to avoid saying "I analyze language for its social effects" but rather "I analyze the _use_ of language for its social effects." If you are going to put words in my mouth at least get close to what I might say.