The Benefits of Profanity

While doing some quick research for a friend, I ran across an excerpt from the following work:

The Psychology of Profanity. By G. T. W. Patrick.

The psychology of profanity, when finally written, will throw considerable light upon two unsolved but much-discussed problems: first, the origin of language, and second, the relation between emotion and expression... Words and phrases used in profane swearing may be divided roughly into seven classes:

1. Names of deities, angels, and devils.
2. Names connected with the sacred matters of religion.
3. Names of saints, holy persons, and biblical characters.
4. Names of sacred places.
5. Words relating to the future life.
6. Vulgar words.
7. Expletives.

The history of profanity is closely connected with the history of religion, since profanity prevailed at those times and among those people where great sacredness attached to the names of the gods, or to matters of religion. In England, for instance, in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, after the monkish teaching had implanted a vivid consciousness of the suprasanctity of the body of Christ, and of every scene connected with His death, there burst upon the country a wave of imprecation in which profane use was made of the body and members and wounds of Christ, and of many things connected with His sufferings. Fossil remains of these oaths have come down to us in such expressions as 'zounds,' 's'death,' 'bodikins,' 'odsbodikins,' etc. The significance of this historical circumstance will be seen when we discover that the psychological value of an oath depends upon the force of the 'shock' which it is capable of giving. The occasion of profanity in general is a situation in which there is a high degree of emotion, usually of the aggressive type, accompanied by a certain feeling of helplessness. In cases of great fear, where action is impossible, as in impending shipwreck, men pray; in great anger, unless they can act, they swear. The subjective effects of profanity are characteristic and peculiar. The most striking effect is that of a pleasant feeling of relief from a painful stress. It has a pacifying or purifying effect... profanity is ancient and deep-seated, and probably one of the oldest forms of language.

In animal life, anger is the psychical accompaniment of a failure to coördinate the usual sensory and motor elements connected with combat. Any modifications of the usual reactions of combat of such a character as to induce in the opponent reactions of flight, will be useful and therefore preserved. Terrifying forms of phonation, such as the growl or the roar, are of this characacter[sic]. As vocal language develops, this vocalization will always select the most terrifying, the most 'shocking' words. All the words actually used in profanity are found to possess this common quality. Profanity is to be understood as originally not an expression of emotion, but as a life-serving form of activity. It does not generate emotion. Indirectly it allays it.

You can find more by going here.

(I "bolded" text for added emphasis -- Chris)

So I'm wondering...should profanity (or certain types of profanity) be allowed or perhaps encouraged?

Comments

[tammy]

that's interesting. in orienting to my new job this week, i'm finding that mental health professionals, when not in the presence of their clients, don't hesitate to swear freely. it's just a part of the culture.

[Pavel (addai)]

I don't know guess I'm the conservative on this one. Well I guess thats my usual role. Anyway, I think this stuff is problematic. I wish I hadn't started to cuss when I was a teenager. I had almost entirely dropped it, a few months back (When I was still a priesthood candidate with my previous org.) but when I changed denoms and put that sort of thing on hold, it slowly crept back....

Anyway I think this is one of the problems with pomo, making cussing cool. Cussing in the pulpit etc. I think they think are showing themselves to be human etc. But in reality they are degrading the profession of the ministry, profaning sacred space etc.

I can also think of one occasion in particular. You know I was driving with my former bishop and someone did something wreckless in front of me (which made me afraid, or frustrated) and I nearly said the infamous F word. But I had just enough self control to not do it. Which made me feel really releaved because he was defintely old school and would not ahve udnerstood in the least. Anyway that bishop though had defintely been around. He had met (And prophesied at times too) Presidentss, Kings and Prime Minsiters. Even though on some issues he was too old fashioned. For that time, I did value that kind of discipline. If you are going to be able to influence the hich echelons of society (which can impact the world) you need to watch you manners and behavior. I think this is something lots of folks don't get. And by being free with cussing they are limmiting their potential. Kind of like folks who want to get a huge tatoo, on some visible place like their arm. Then wonder why they have trouble landing good jobs etc.

[Chris]

Thanks for the feedback, Tammy and Pavel!

Do you think that there is such a thing as "appropriate" as well as "inappropriate" profanity? Or...is ALL profanity wrong?

p.s. I think I've heard that Paul's use of me genoito in 1 Cor.6:15 was tantamount to profanity.

[Pavel (addai)]

(1 Cor.6:15) I'm not sure if simply mentioning a body part, like genitals is automatic profanity. There is some need for basic communication. I'm not if that reference would equate to a present day vulgarism. My understanding it equates to our present term "genitals", in my Aramaic study Bible it was translated as "member". What I know of some of the slang references for that stuff has to do with things like food; figs in the middle east and meditereranean (the english expression "A fig on thee"). I remember in the movie Sparticus there a scene taking place in a spa, where a Roman Gerneal is obviously coming on to a slave played by Tony Curtis. He asks him if he prefers "oysters" or "snails", the General say he "likes both" (bisexual) etc.

[Chris]

LOL! LOL!

Hmmm. Well... I guess looking at that transliteration (me genoito), you might have thought I was talking about genitals -- LOL!

Actually, the phrase is commonly translated: "may it never be!" (some see a vernacular equivilent in "hell, no!")

[tammy]

it depends up on your attitude when you use those words. it can come from many motivations. the powerful people swear too. they just wait until the right time.

[Chris]

"Powerful people swear too. They just wait until the right time." That sounds fairly legitimizing.

You know, something else about profanity that's poppin' back into my brain -- some people see a sense of "irreverance" as characteristic of postmodernity. This is something I started a thread about last year on TheOoze. Do you think (or still think) this has credibility?

[Pavel (addai)]

Well Irreverent humor doesnot have to be profane. I like what my friend actually calls some of this pomo cussing stuff "Poorman's profundity". Because some people seem to cuss; because they think you are thinking to narrow, but in doing so it will shock you into not being such a prudish narrow minded person. But in reality, I think it often shows a lack of creativity on their part because many people can do this by making a witty remark, or a keen observation, and not have to use any form of cussing whatsoever. Doing so however takes something called talent...which soem people don't want to work to cultivate.

[tammy]

--"irreverance" as characteristic of postmodernity--

i think that's a characteristic of disillusioned christians who are entertaining postmodern thought.

i don't know if it's a characteristic of postmodernism itself.

[Chris]

Tammy, could pluralism and the end of legalism (postmodern notions) be contributing to the increase in profanity?

[tammy]

'pluralism and the end of legalism ... contributing to the increase in profanity'

legalism - yes.
pluralism - i'm not seeing the connection?

[Chris]

Tammy -- here's what I'm thinking: in a pluralistic culture, it's easy to justify beliefs and behaviors that otherwise -- in a unified system -- would likely not be an option. Maybe a better term would be postmodern antinomianism?