But when he say his “psychotic disorder is harder on me than it is on you” it sounds a bit like the guy who beats his wife while saying “it hurts me more than it hurts you.”
Destigmatization should not be a license for communism/cancel culture.
21–30 of 211 posts
But when he say his “psychotic disorder is harder on me than it is on you” it sounds a bit like the guy who beats his wife while saying “it hurts me more than it hurts you.”
Destigmatization should not be a license for communism/cancel culture.
It is not, in fact, "unambiguously a lie" to relate to others deBoer's grave (and admitted, and unambiguously real) misconduct without the full context of his mental illness. People are entitled to form their own opinions about deBoer's credibility, and he is not entitled to set conditions on how they do that.
I don't know deBoer from Adam, mind you, so I'm only going off the article as written. That said, while it's not strictly a lie to communicate deBoer's actions without conveying how psychosis played a role, it seems to leave out important context in favor of the presumption that he's simply an asshole. My assignment of credibility to deBoer could be substantially colored by learning of his psychosis and current effor…
It is not, in fact, "unambiguously a lie" to relate to others deBoer's grave (and admitted, and unambiguously real) misconduct without the full context of his mental illness. People are entitled to form their own opinions about deBoer's credibility, and he is not entitled to set conditions on how they do that.
It is not, in fact, "unambiguously a lie" to relate to others deBoer's grave (and admitted, and unambiguously real) misconduct without the full context of his mental illness. People are entitled to form their own opinions about deBoer's credibility, and he is not entitled to set conditions on how they do that.
Oh Freddie. You'll never get the peace you want from other people, it can only be found within yourself.
> But in fact I had not intended to cancel Harris; I hadn’t intended anything at all. I would have attacked him, physically, had he been present, over a pure delusion, which I say with shame I can’t put into words. But I was not thinking that I would hurt his reputation. I was not thinking of cause and effect in any conventional way. I was not in a mental state where I was capable of understanding long-term consequen…
With relation to mental illness, this issue becomes exacerbated. The anomie, or separation from the human race, is almost intolerable on platforms like Twitter and Instagram. All of it feeds into the grinder of selling more widgets and moving more product.
Mental illness or not, there's no excuse for these kinds of false accusations. It's certainly understandable given Freddie's condition. But us understanding why it happened doesn't ethically justify their actions, and it also doesn't relieve the perpetrators from the consequences of their actions.
"To those of you who are not people I harmed in my psychotic episode in August 2017… what is it you think I owe you?" - What I'd like is to simply not hear from this person in public again. I don't want them to have any sort of public social power, given their capability to totally ruin an innocent person's life.
Get a job, like most of the rest of us, and stop being a public figure. That's what I'd like
> But in fact I had not intended to cancel Harris; I hadn’t intended anything at all. I would have attacked him, physically, had he been present, over a pure delusion, which I say with shame I can’t put into words. But I was not thinking that I would hurt his reputation. I was not thinking of cause and effect in any conventional way. I was not in a mental state where I was capable of understanding long-term consequen…
I think it’s clear that social media (or more broadly, “the internet”), is exacerbating mental health issues. At the very same time, the ability to connect with people around the world is undoubtedly also reducing mental health issues (for some) by building bridges to friendships and social connections they otherwise would not have. It is a double edged sword. The internet serves to amplify the extremes. At least tha…
But in total, I would say some social media platforms are worse than others. I long for the calmness and organization of the old MyBB forums.
> But in fact I had not intended to cancel Harris; I hadn’t intended anything at all. I would have attacked him, physically, had he been present, over a pure delusion, which I say with shame I can’t put into words. But I was not thinking that I would hurt his reputation. I was not thinking of cause and effect in any conventional way. I was not in a mental state where I was capable of understanding long-term consequen…
It is not, in fact, "unambiguously a lie" to relate to others deBoer's grave (and admitted, and unambiguously real) misconduct without the full context of his mental illness. People are entitled to form their own opinions about deBoer's credibility, and he is not entitled to set conditions on how they do that.
I don't know deBoer from Adam, mind you, so I'm only going off the article as written. That said, while it's not strictly a lie to communicate deBoer's actions without conveying how psychosis played a role, it seems to leave out important context in favor of the presumption that he's simply an asshole. My assignment of credibility to deBoer could be substantially colored by learning of his psychosis and current effor…
A lie is "[leaving] out the important context"
The most effective way to lie is to use facts. Selectively