h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Is it good to be offensive?

Galileo was offensive. Da Vinci was offensive. In fact, most people with radical and revolutionary ideas in human history have been labelled 'offensive' or 'subversive' in their lifetimes, only to be celebrated by later generations. Having said that, Hitler was also deemed 'offensive'.

Is it helpful to push the boundaries of accepted behaviour by causing offence? Or is being offensive simply, offensive?

Peace and pies.

sometimes to change the structure of an established belief to replace it with a better one, you get called offensive.

all the people you named were putting forward new ideas, as you said, that the established belief could not accept. no matter how nicely they put it they would still be deemed offensive in the face of establishment.

Galileo wanted to destroy the beliefs of science with his theories.

Da Vinci is still deemed offensive by some today for his abstract expressions

people like Hitler were just maniacs.

Can beliefs be 'better' than each other? Theories can, but beliefs are, well... beliefs.

Personally, I love it when someone says something or does something that causes outrage in the media. Like Michael Moore at the Oscars, for instance. I just love the waves people can make with a few well-placed words.

The Sex Pistols are another great example, all they did was swear a bit and be unpatriotic, and look at the trouble they caused. Brilliant!

very true, what i meant was by beliefs was somebody in th 15th century saying the world is round and circles the sun going against the established BELIEF that it is flat and is the centre of the universe.

the sex pistols rock!

No, the sex pistols punk.

Who do you think is alive today that will be celebrated by future generations for their 'offensive' nature?

Brian Adams?

weird al yankovic maybe?

marilyn manson definately.

The previous Governor of Texas?

Seriously though...

Being 'offensive' is all rather relative don't you think? Damien Hirst may or may not think of himself as offensive although many people see his work that way either because it uses dead animals ar because of his arrogance. Same goes for the bloke who does the 'Plastination' exhibits (sorry I've forgotten his name).

Most of the historical figures such as Galileo and da Vinci who were thought of as offensive were seen in that light because they went against the prevailing *religious* views of the time and therefore were heretical.

If you're a heretic then you're being offensive to God, and that was thought of at the time as being utterly unforgivable.

but they are recognised now as being right. except fo Da Vinci of course bacause he falls into art category which is always open to opinions.

Quite so

Here's a question. How many do you think there have been who thought of themselves as being as brilliant and radical as someone like Galileo or Copernicus (it was Copernicus who first came up with the idea of the Earth orbiting the Sun wasn't it?) - who thenselves devised a fantastic theory which flew in the face of contemporary thinking... and was so way off beam that their names have been completely forgotten because it was a big pile of pants

so many, too many to count i would think. which is a good thing cos it shows we're thinking

Da Vinci was so much more than an artist. The man was a genius who had ideas that were so far ahead of his time it was impossible for him to bring them anywhere near to fruition.

As for someone who is alive today who is seen as offensive but may be seen differently later is Yasser Arafat. He and Ytzak Rabin almost brought peace to Palastine/Isreal and now because of the attitudes of the more recent Isreali governments he has become persona non grata. He has been recognised previously with a Nobel peace prize but that seems to have been forgotten. It was a very sad day when Ytzak Rabin was assassinated.

*nods head in sollen agreement*

The Osbournes. Especially that Kelly.

Oh and piercings and tattooes.

~shudder~

I also think Gerry Adams will be revered and thought repulsive by different historians.

And who knows what they will say about Tony Blair.

Mae West was thought of as offensive.

Ralph Nader.

Jane Fonda.

Fatty Arbuckle.

William Burroughs.

Jackson Pollack.

Dali.

I've always thought of the Pistols as Mclaren's Monkees...
like Bowwowow after them...

I did buy the albums, but I never did the safety pins.

the closest thing to a real Pistols has to be Lemmy and his bunch.
Now they're offensive.

But do the benefits of such behaviour outway the costs? Does a theory on evolution, for example, justify the shock and outrage inflicted on the populus when the news spreads?

If it makes people think, then probably, yes.

Interesting that people often say disgusted when what they really mean is offended.

I agree. But what I hate is offending people for no reason. If its just to get a rise out of someone, then it is useless. I much prefer a bit of intelligence behind a potentialy 'offensive' statement.

Oh yes, it's offensive to deliberately offend someone for the sake of it. Some people are of course offensive without intent. And some are downright disgusting!

Unfortunately a provocative statement which happens to offend some people, I think is unlikely make them re-examine their opinion. If they were more open inded they wouldn't be so offended.

Sorry, that should have read open minded