PHIL276 Language in Society
explores ( Frege , 1948 , p . 213 ), as this is an aspect which isn ’ t sufficiently discussed by critics of Fregean colouring such as Dummett ( 1973 , p . 88 ) and Hom ( 2008 , p . 422 ). My approach to Fregean minimalism would also not restrict intra-ethnic appropriation of epithets , as this would be unreasonable to prevent the generally inoffensive intra-group use of racial epithets , since it is clearly not “ insulting or provocative ” and doesn ’ t risk harming the rights of the ethnic minorities ( Brink , 2001 , p . 148 ). Comparatively , prohibitionist accounts of epithets take a much more restrictive approach to epithets , claiming that racial epithets are offensive and that any deviation of the prohibition risks offence , regardless of the context or motivation behind the use of any given epithet ( Anderson and Lepore , 2013 , p . 353-354 ; Lepore and Stone , 2018 , pp . 134-139 ). Prohibitionist accounts of racial epithets appear to then lead to the outright banning of the use of racial epithets regardless of context or intent , which appears to go against Mill ’ s philosophy , as the harm principle allows people to risk offence in favour of free expression as long as there is no direct and intentional harm caused ( Mill , [ 1859 ] 2010 , p . 110 ). My application of Fregean minimalism to the legal context of epithets is therefore preferable , since it would not lead
SOTA Anthology 19 / 20
to a blanket ban on the inoffensive intra-ethnic use of racial epithets .
Section 3
However , whilst I have argued that intra-ethnic use of epithets shouldn ’ t be illegal , it could be objected that Fregean minimalism does not explain why there are instances of intra-ethnic use of racial epithets . Christopher Hom argues that a philosophy of epithets should note how “ targeted groups often appropriate uses of their own epithets to alter their meanings for nonderogatory purposes ” ( 2008 , p . 428 ). Using the example of the N-word and the term ’ s appropriation by Black Hip- Hop artists , Hom explores Tupac Shakur ’ s use of the word , wherein he attempted to alter the meaning of the word , removing the N-word ’ s association with slavery , to instead try to associate the epithet with a more positive set of ideas ( ibid .). It is for this reason that Hom rejects prohibitionism , which ignores the context in which the epithet is uttered , in its treatment of slurs ( Anderson and Lepore , 2013 , p . 350 ). Comparatively , Fregean minimalism explains offence as being caused by the subjective associations in the listener ’ s mind according to the hints of the speaker . However , adopting Fregean minimalism leads to a problem – why is the impact of the epithet suddenly different when