A Reflection on the Culture of Name Calling

Negative name-calling, as an emotional style and way of relating, leads not merely with an accusation but with the verdict. It is as if sheriff, judge, and jury have all had due process and rolled their conclusion into the very introduction of who a person is. It commits the logical fallacy known as "begging the question," which means that the point which is in question (for example, the merit of a person being discussed) is secretly concluded and embedded within the question itself as an unchallenged premise. Name calling takes away the chance for the listener to examine the basis on which the name is given. 

Name calling is dangerous. Because it makes judgment upon the person being discussed a foregone conclusion, the next reasonable step in responding to that person includes the possibility of punishment, including everything from ostracism to death. Name calling is like walking around with a gun, cocked and aimed at other people, finger on the trigger--which also happens to be a hair-trigger. Ordinary discourse, when it is civil, puts a hedge between ourselves and this danger, like having a safety lock on the gun. 

Name calling packs judgement of the person all into the initial epithet, where it cannot be easily unpacked and assessed, because the emotion of the judgment has already been imparted, even if later questioning causes us to recognize the name is unfair. Name calling inevitably damages our image of the person being described, or injures our own emotions upon hearing it, in the same way that vandalism unfailingly leaves an uninvited consequence. It always leave something to clean up or to heal. Only eventually does it also damage the reputation of the one calling names, which is perhaps the most appropriate place for the damage to land. 

Name calling is also unnecessary. Once we recover from the initial shock or euphoria of hearing names being called, we eventually move to the question of whether the name is fair or not. Whether we determine it is or it isn't, we apparently already had enough evidence at hand to conclude the matter ourselves, without the dubious assistance of the hurtful name as our introduction to the question. The name calling did nothing but prematurely inflict injury by pointing out a flaw, the validity of which we have not yet been given a chance to consider.

There are reasons why name calling is a favorite tactic of bullies. And, there are reasons why we do not want bullies defining how it is that we talk in public life.