Philosophy grad Justin Carter

Academics who insult each other in scholarly writing or at conferences may want to refer to the children’s rhyme: “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.” Or they could read The Ethics of Insults,” a master’s thesis by recent philosophy graduate Justin Carter.

After reading Beyond Good and Evil by Friedrich Nietzsche, Carter was inspired to examine the use of insults in academia.

“I noticed that he uses insults quite a bit,” says Carter. “Nietzsche is one of the masters of insults in philosophy.” In the book, Nietzsche takes aim at fellow philosopher Immanuel Kant, which prompted Carter to look at the merits of insults. “The last thing you consider them to be is something integral to the point that the author is trying to make,” he says.

Aside from books, Carter has observed insulting exchanges between academics at conferences. “The level of decorum can drop very quickly when certain contentious issues are being touched upon.” Arguments can break out between academics who have a history together, he adds, or a seasoned academic may use insults to undermine a less experienced counterpart.

If the insults serve no purpose other than to degrade or humiliate the victim, they are usually considered socially unacceptable, says Carter.

But academics don’t need to resort to insults to get their point across. They can simply dismiss their opponent’s argument as being irrelevant. Backing up a dismissal with an explanation is more effective than a dismissal alone, he adds.

Regardless of whether you agree or disagree with someone, Carter says it’s important to respect their point of view. “Even if I think a person is wrong, I still have to give their differing point of view a measure of respect, and that respect is indicated to the person by providing a critique. The act of critiquing a position is itself an indication of respect.”

In some cases, an insult may be more effective than a dismissal. “As a rhetorical tool, insults are sometimes very effective strategies for argumentation,” says Carter. “A blank dismissal doesn’t have the same character as an insulting dismissal.”

An attack on a vulnerable group, for example, may conjure moral outrage that is more effectively expressed as an insult rather than another type of dismissal, says Carter. Insults may be justified when the “oppressive claims being made against a group can cause some kind of direct harm,” he adds. “In that case, you would want to use any rhetorical strategy available to you to shut that person up. Insults are going to be a particularly good one.”

The decision to use an insult depends on the context of the situation and potential outcome.

Carter gives some examples of when insults may be appropriate, but cautions that every situation is different and there are no definitive guidelines. If a significant power difference exists between the attacker and the victim, insults may be warranted for defensive purposes, he says.  But if an argument between two people turns into an insult battle, he recommends that one of the parties walk away to avoid an escalation of tempers.

As language evolves over time, insults may lose their negative connotations. A group of people may embrace an insult directed at them, using it to define themselves in a positive way, which “defangs” the insult, says Carter. “We’re going to use this word in a positive way and add another level of meaning to it. There’s nothing that stops us from adding new meanings over time or rehabilitating the words.”

Carter received a scholarship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council as well as an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. He plans to attend medical school or a PhD program in the future.