'Unless' vs 'Until' in formal language -and- Being a Douche · 10:17pm Jul 17th, 2013
If you ever receive formal training in certain subjects, such as literature, rhetoric or law, it becomes quite apparent that words, typically single words carefully considered and placed in particular areas, can be immensely powerful, perhaps more so than more 'significant' words used elsewhere. This does relate, in some way, to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or linguistic relativity, which says that words either nuance our world or define the boundaries themselves. The strong version, which says that language is the defining factor of the world, is a bit woo-woo, and has little research support, while the weaker version, which merely says that words are useful in helping to make the world more nuanced, is a bit more acceptable. This is also more demonstrable, as in languages that lack words for colors speakers see rarely or not at all. The speakers find it more difficult to recognize those colors among similar colors or to pick out different shades of those colors.
This is all a big run-up to a bit of Equestrian world-building. I was noticing that whenever someone speaks about suspects, the presumption of innocence is stated as, "Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law." I thought nothing of it until I started doing fictional work with Equestrian courts and came to realize that with their bedrock presumptions and attitudes that would be a shocking construction, and repellant to Equestrian sensibilities. I imagine the Equestrian courts say that all citizens and aliens not given over to their court of origin, are "Innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law."
That sounds like the same thing, but remember, language is often more complex than you can imagine, particularly formal language in important places like law. While I avoid the idiocy of Pseudolaw and the reliance on magical thinking and attempts at using magical words to make things happen in court, there are times when small changes in a single word can make all the difference. In this case the distinction is subtle and has to do with presumptions.
Saying 'until' casts a subtle pall of presumption upon the accused. It smacks of inevitability. "Yea, yea, we'll assume you're innocent, just for fun, but then when we finally prove you're guilty you're going down!" By contrast, saying 'unless' is much more in line with the spirit of the idea of innocence as the bedrock presumption. "You come in here accused but absent a pall of guilt. That must be established by the prosecution." That's generally how it works, or ought to.
Remember, the burden is on the one making the accusation. That's the burden of proof and that is another discussion for another time.
- - -
Douchiness is an unfortunately common thing. Even among Bronies. It is especially egregious among Bronies because, in some sense, we ought to be cut from a finer cloth after internalizing lessons on friendship and cooperation. Yes, circumstances in life can lead to temporary negativity but an advanced and civilized person should be capable of avoiding contact during times of negativity or moderating their own responses until mood has improved. Yet not only is this not so, some folk relish the chance to be cruel to others. Though I would normally hesitate to mention actual names, SWFPony was openly callous and heartless towards someone who had been forced into homelessness for coming out as gay, the kind of thing which contributes to a high suicide rate, especially among homosexual teens. And Regidar is almost infamous for being a flaming racist. Now I'm sure he would try to whitewash it as "Racial Realism" which is racism/racialism with the name changed and the serial numbers filed off, but given that the only serious usage is by White Supremacists and other bigots that whitewash comes off as just so much bunk.
Given that these are faceless internet denizens, a comedic but very thought-provoking consideration comes in here. John Gabriel's Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory. The mathematics of this theory are as follows: Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad. This makes a certain degree of sense, as the distance afforded by the internet means that there will be no general social consequences that affect the immediate circle of the one performing the antisocial act. This vitiates the capability of both Game theory and Market theory to correct the negative activity. Now there may be internet social consequences but just plug in a new account and things can continue, especially as anonymity means no one can tell when a new figure is an old one wearing a cheap suit. People with established internet reputations are unlikely to be in that category but sometimes they can be, because of a general social trend that seemed to rise with postmodernism and the attached cynicism and relativism, that of considering negativity a good thing, callous cruelty being both entertaining and appropriate even if, on a macro level, universalizing that kind of activity would result in social collapse.
There is a more formal term for this, with actual study. It is called the Online Disinhibition Effect. Because of the very nature of the internet, folks either feel freer to 'hit and run' with offensive things that they don't have to be held accountable for saying, or regard the others on with internet as less than human because there are zero actual cues to that effect, such as voice and expression. A frightening thought. Dehumanization is one of the more difficult but telling steps in a path to genocide.
Both GIFT and ODE most probably explain the prevalence of trollfics and most gorefics that exist. They are cheap sensationalism, using naughty words and 'scandalous' situations to get a reaction. The three-year-old's preferred tactic of 'All attention is good attention.' Now, connecting to before there may be legitimate literary reasons for what is posted, but that can only be told with author input and with supplemental materials that explain the points. Taken at face value only even most deep examinations can become tawdry and cheap.
It will serve best, when operating in and trying to move in status within a community, to be a positive influence and to leave good impressions behind. The invisible hand of the market will reward positive press and crush negative actors, while game interactions will influence how others react or approach, with a positive reputation inviting positive approaches or reactions to requests and a negative reputation bringing rejection and spurning.
Hrm... This is quite the eloquent rant.
I'm not sure your original point has a very strong relationship to the rest of the blog, but from a empirical standpoint, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has things backwards. It is easily displayed that a culture that has a concept will develop the language to convey that concept. For example: Filipino has one word for cold (with two or three modifiers to that single root word). This language was developed on a tropical island. English developed in a more harsh environment, and has many words for cold. Cool, clammy, chilly, freezing, frigid, cold, icy... etc. This does not mean someone from the Philippines is incapable of feeling cold, simply that there was not a need for the verbiage. The same goes for the color example that you pointed out. Different strains of genetics give slightly different color perception. It's not uncommon for entire cultures to be able to see slightly different wavelengths. So naturally they don't create words for those colors that they simply have never seen.
On your commentary on "unless" vs. "until" I have to point out that there is a positive and a negative to both choices. The negative that you didn't mention to "unless" is that it implies that if the court does not find the accused guilty then the crime didn't happen. So if they don't get caught they are by definition innocent. I don't have an opinion on which verbiage is more appropriate though.
And yea... I hate the anonymity that the internet provides. I have heard people tell me with complete and utter sincerity others on the internet aren't real. He simply did not believe that there was a real person behind each of those screen names.
1217335
Solipsism is one of the points mentioned in the article on ODE. People can become convinced that the other users are nothing more than sophisticated Turing machines rather than other humans. A distressing fact.
And you are right, that verbiage grows from need, but sometimes a paucity can influence perception. Imagine if you have one word for cold rather than a nuanced graduation. The one with one word in the cold would be JUST cold through all nuances. They would feel a bit limited in description and in perception. A subtle distinction but present.
The 'unless' point is not quite right. That is the presumption of being found not guilty in our world.
description, yes. But I would argue that perception would not be effected. Take a person with only one word for cold and out him in a room at 5 deg C. Ask him how it feels and he will tell you "cold". Then out him in a room that's -10 C. He will say "more cold" or "very cold". The lack of a way to express the gradients of temperature do not prevent him from feeling the difference.
I'm not following what you are trying to say here.
But to restate my point: until implies a cause and effect. You commit a crime and you will be found guilty. Unless implies a chance of cause and effect.
Consider telling a child "it's all fun and games until someone gets hurt." This phrase implies that if they continue with their activities there will be consequences. If you change it to "unless someone gets hurt," it implies the mere chance of consequences. And if you know children, a chance of getting away with fun will always be taken...
This blog was both insightful and educational. Thank you for reminding me of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, for example, encouraging me to read about it again. I utterly see your point with regard to 'unless versus until', and agree.
I think I will search your back catalog of blogs for more gems.
That unless/until distinction is really great, and you're absolutely right about taking that path.
Can we expect any more of this philosophizing in the future, or have you just been in an existential rant mood lately?
Very good post here. I wish to see more if you ever feel in the mood again.
1218107
I hope for more. It has always been my intent to only create blogs when I have something erudite to say. I have a reputation to uphold. And lately I have had a lot of thoughts in this sort of vein.
1217382
What I meant on the "innocent" part was that if someone is found Not Guilty they return to a presumption of being innocent. The crime happened but no culpable party can be identified, only suspected.
The inevitability of harm is being used as a threat in your example. The courts cannot be so petty and biased. Courts must be neutral and above such things.
1217422
I have few blogs but I like to think the ones I have are good.
Huh! Sommat to think on, certes...
In re: racism: If the media got as wildly indignant about Hadiya Pendleton as it did over Trayvon Martin, the world would be a better place. Just sayin'.
1220363
The media doesn't know what to do half the time. Still, I managed to avoid most of the hoopla by limiting my consumption of news to very narrow subjects and keeping away from front pages. Except around here. The front page news here right now is about ComicCon being huge and Mayor Bob Filner's sexual harassment scandal.