Anti-?
Antithetic: a) Of the nature of
Antithesis. b)opposing, controversial. c)contrasted, directly
opposite
Lately, there has been a lot of talk in
the press and on social media and on the Web about 'anti-this' and
'anti-that'. Some people are said to be 'anti-vaccination', others
are said to be 'anti-GMO', and of course there are the much old and
more familiar groups who are 'anti-abortion' or 'anti-war'. Are these
people and groups all really the same in the way in which they are
'anti-one-thing' or 'anti-another'? No. Of course not. But those who
throw around the 'anti-' label when it doesn't really apply are
hoping that you wouldn't notice that. But, by the time you are done
reading this—you will have.
When some person or group is
'anti-something' it means that they don't just decline to participate
in it, but they oppose it existing for other people as well.
An example would be me: I am antithetical or 'anti-' to several
things. I am antithetical to murder, so I am 'anti-murder'. Not only
do I not want to be the victim of murder or commit murder, but also I
am opposed to it going on any where—and I support effective
measures to halt murder wherever it may be happening. I am
'anti-assault'. Not only do I not want to be involved in
assaults, I don't want anyone to be. I am anti-fraud, if a
person has made a promise (a contractual obligation) then I am
opposed to that person not delivering on that promise. So those are
clear examples of how I am antithetical to some things.
In similar a vein, other people may be
'anti-war' or 'anti-abortion'. Not only declining to participate, but
also opposing other people being involved in the things that they are
antithetical towards. But here is where things begin to get
confusing: some people may not wish to be involved with war or
involved with something like abortion, but those people may not
oppose such things going on beyond their participation. Some people
don't want their country to be involved in a war, but are indifferent
if other countries are engaged in conflict—as long as it doesn't
involve them. Also, some people may avoid having an abortion, but may
not support the prevention of abortion among other people. But for
both of those issues, there are still other people who don't want to
participate and don't want anyone else to
participate in them either. Those people are more than just declining
to be involved with something, they are antithetical to it happening
anywhere.
So
what about the 'antivaxxers, the 'anti-vaccination' people? Are they
really antithetical to vaccines happening anywhere? And what about
the 'anti-GMO' people, 'anti-evolution' people or even the
'anti-science' people? Well, let's take a quick look at this and sort
it out.
Do the
'anti-vaccine' people push for the halting of vaccines everywhere, by
everybody? Not that I have seen. I have never heard of people who
choose not to get vaccines for themselves or their families advocate
that vaccine be banned. If those people had the same antithetical
position as I have on murder or assault then they surely would be
'anti-vaccine'. But they don't. They don't want to halt all vaccines,
they just want to not be forced to participate. So they are clearly
not 'anti-vaccine'.
Moving on--
Do
'anti-evolution' people want the study of evolution to be stopped? Do
they demand that evolution not be taught anywhere? If you can find
some that actually do want that, then you have found people who truly
are 'anti-evolution', but if you cannot, then you have people who
simply want to be able to decline to participate
or , at most, people who want their view to get equal billing. Call
it what you will, but don't call it 'anti-evolution' because
it's not.
What
about the 'anti-GMO' people? Are they really antithetical to
Genetically Modified Organisms? Well, some are and some aren't. Some
are concerned that GMO's will interact with the natural environment
and escape the confines of laboratories and GMO farms and have
unknown (and presumably harmful) effects on the environment. Those
people are 'anti-GMO', yes. But the rest are merely wanting to be
able to opt-out and not participate in the producing or consumption
of GMO products when they go to the super-market. These
people are not
'anti-GMO'.
And
lastly, what about the people called 'anti-science'? Are there people
who are really antithetical to the organized inquiry into the world
around use that—when done properly—is called science? Perhaps,
but you haven't met them. Not really. The people you have met have
been people who didn't understand science or how it worked, or
perhaps didn't accepts all of the conclusion's of science as true—but
that hardly makes them 'anti-science'. The only 'anti-science' people
are those such as the Luddites who would show how antithetical they
were by destroying machinery. There aren't many of them around today
because science is just an idea—like reasoning and mathematics—it
helps you understand the world around you. And there just aren't that
many people to be found anywhere who are really antithetical to
trying to understand things. I imagine that there are a few—but
only a few.
So
what is going on here? Who is really 'anti-' here and why are so many
people being misnamed?
There
are two problems:
The
first is linguistic. Just as there wasn't a word to describe the
first two decades of the twenty-first century (as the other decades
were called the 'eighties' or the 'nineties') there isn't a word to
use in place of 'anti-' to create a hybrid that would convey that a
person isn't antithetical
to something but is merely skeptical or simply doesn't wish to
participate. Calling someone 'anti-vaccine' or 'anti-science' is easy
and has an immediate understanding within our language. Calling
someone 'skepti-science' or 'skepti-vaccine' doesn't have as quick of
an 'in' to being easily understood (or misunderstood) in our
language. And there is no readily available alternative to 'anti-',
so we are left with calling people something that they are not.
The second problem is one of social
politics. Calling someone 'anti-vaccine' or 'anti-evolution' is a
quick-and-dirty way of mislabeling their position (also called a
'Straw Man Argument') and thus makes it easy to deride the person or
group for something they haven't done or said. This may be done
because of sloppiness or it may be done intentionally.
When done intentionally, it is
something I take particular offense towards because it represents a
fundamental ethical failure to treat people in this way. Would the
people doing this like to be slandered and mislabeled by others? I
think not. But some will do use the word 'anti-' knowing full well
that it isn't really what the other people believe because it makes
those other people easier to vilify. And those are the real
'anti-'s here.
The
people who intentionally vilify those who just want to opt-out of
believing in something or doing something are the real 'anti-'s.
And what are the antithetical of? Tolerance.
People
who cannot allow others to have their own beliefs and behaviors are
intolerant of the beliefs and behaviors that are not their own. They
are anti-tolerance.
And the people who just want to be allowed the space to have their
own believes and conduct their own behavior need to stop encouraging
these bullies to continue their attack on them. They need to stand up
and call out these bullies as the anti-tolerant.....'people' that
they are.
I know
that some may be clever enough to say that they are 'anti-measles'
and that such a position makes it alright for them to bully others
into getting a measles vaccine. I don't necessarily accept that
argument, BUT if a person truly were 'anti-measles' and was only
concerned with preventing the disease, then the way to do it isn't
but becoming a tyrant or a bully but by respecting
other people and understanding their concerns and skepticism as well
as a person understands his own position. Then a person who is only
'anti-measles' will be able to work with
those other people instead of against them.
And
that is my conclusion and advice. Don't let something that you really
are antithetical
towards make you become antithetical towards other people.
I know that requires a lot more work, but I think you will find the
extra effort worth it. At least, I hope so.
for more essays and for short stories, check out MHHickey.com
for talk about books, swords, and nerd hobbies, check out Booksandswords.com
