The language we use develops habits that affect the way we see, hear and think, subsequently shaping ourselves and our society. Once in a while, we have to break these habits to be able to see, hear and think in a new way.
Yes, it takes effort to change linguistic habits. But why maintain a way of speaking that repeats and strengthens prejudices? In principle, everyone is allowed to say what they want; after all, we have freedom of speech. Freedom, however, ends where it restricts the freedom of others. Therefore, the question of whether we should or should not say everything that crosses our minds arises. Not because someone forbids us from doing so, but because we want to create a society in which all are treated equally regardless of sex, skin colour, origin or religion. - Anna Schiff
Interviewer: "Mr. Luhmann, when it comes to the diesel scandal..." - Hans-Jochen Luhmann: "Sorry, I have to correct your assessment of the situation right away [or apply a
Linguistic Habit-Breaker
]. This is about failure, of which the so-called diesel scandal is an impact. It is a systematic failure of the Federal Motor Transport Authorities in Europe. They don't implement the requirements of EU legislators, and the Member States allow this to happen. All of the necessary vehicle specifications thus go unchecked, not just the detail of "diesel exhaust gases". The infamous "diesel scandal" is comparable to themes raised in Elisabeth Wehling's wonderful book, on how a nation talks itself into thinking - and how, in turn, this can influence policy decisions. The intention of this creation of words is to help to establish a precise focus in order to remove other things from the scope of our attention.. If we take a closer look, a whole chain of loopholes may come to light. For example, there were noticeable differences between the nitrogen oxide values of diesel vehicles and the gradual divergence between target and actual values. A difference of 30 percent for Euro 2 to 700 percent for Euro 6 can also be seen in the data on CO2 emissions, including for gasoline engines. Car manufacturers even cheat about noise emissions. We're not at the end, we're still at the beginning."
Self-learning algorithms, robots in humanless factories and self-propelled cars are just some examples of current progress initiatives which are directly attributable to technology advancements. But what is this technical progress, really? Is the technical progress and increasing dehumanization simply our fate as humankind, with nothing we can do about it anyway? It is time to use the
Linguistic Habit-Breaker
. We have to realize that there are motives and drivers for all progress; nothing happens by itself, but economic and ideological framework conditions determine what is researched, what is invented and what is used. The framework conditions have to be renegotiated and changed again and again with the participation of everyone in a democracy.