I would like closure, but I'll take honesty • Hacker News Board

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#41

Post by licebmi__at__ » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:04 PM UTC

spadros wrote: post #24

tptacek wrote: post #11

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.

As somebody in a family with bipolar I have to disagree. Someone's schizophrenic episodes should be taken into account in judging their actions, just as one's manic episodes should be as well. This in no way excuses their behavior. Whether or not you want to continue associating with that person is a different matter.

Why should it matter? I mean, if somebody tells me that they are intimate with the president, if they want to con me, or are troubled with mental illness, shouldn’t make a difference on the judgment of how trustable are their statements.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#42

Post by spadros » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:04 PM UTC

newbamboo wrote: post #21

I like Freddie despite his mental problems/communism. His heart usually seems in right place even if his brain isn’t working right. 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.

I think he argues quite harshly against himself and says that his actions cannot be excused. He seems to harbour quite a bit of guilt and shame around this topic.

For context, bipolar is one of the highest suicide risk diseases due to this. When you come out of a manic episode you tend to feel intense shame and guilt for your actions. For reference, 1 in 2 bipolar will attempt suicide in their life. 1 in 5 will successfully end their life in the long run. So it is important to take his real admission of guilt and request for forgiveness into account.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#43

Post by scythe » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:04 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #11

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.

A lie is intentional. Regardless of the falsehood, it is not a lie if you believe it when you say it.

But it is certainly misleading to make these claims about deBoer's actions without context. If this is intentional, then it is intentionally misleading. I wonder if there's a word for that.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#44

Post by weeblewobble » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:04 PM UTC

lostdog wrote: post #35

tptacek wrote: post #11

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 the background, but I do think that saying or implying that he was conniving or strategically malicious would be a lie. Are you suggesting that he may not even be bipolar?

"unambiguously" a lie?

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#45

Post by watwut » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:06 PM UTC

mrtranscendence wrote: post #17

tptacek wrote: post #11

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…

When DeBoer calls it a lie, he is doing what he complains about - does not care about motivation or context in which that statement was given.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#46

Post by johncolanduoni » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:07 PM UTC

licebmi__at__ wrote: post #41

spadros wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As somebody in a family with bipolar I have to disagree. Someone's schizophrenic episodes should be taken into account in judging their actions, just as one's manic episodes should be as well. This in no way excuses their behavior. Whether or not you want to continue associating with that person is a different matter.

Why should it matter? I mean, if somebody tells me that they are intimate with the president, if they want to con me, or are troubled with mental illness, shouldn’t make a difference on the judgment of how trustable are their statements.

Are there medications you can take to make you drastically less likely to try to con people?

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#47

Post by rhizome » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:07 PM UTC

spadros wrote: post #15

wayoutthere wrote: post #4

I feel profound empathy here. Having been on both sides of this situation, it’s just really complicated . You can forgive a person but really once you’ve seen them in manic psychosis you will never fully trust them or their judgment ever again. There are a lot of contradictory emotions at work and they’re all valid. It’s kind of a shit lot in life, but you get good at making new friends. Eventually you can get it und…

Bipolar is a tragic disease. It's something that's pretty rampant in my family. You eventually get to a point that the author is. You can't excuse your behavior, but you want people to know desperately that those actions aren't the normal you. There's an acceptance that people will cut you off from their lives, and that's fair. Hurts but its the way it is.

Freddie doesn't have to be a public figure. He could become a web developer and go by his middle name and quietly cruise out the rest of his years like the drummer for Flock of Seagulls or something.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#48

Post by tptacek » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:08 PM UTC

spadros wrote: post #24

tptacek wrote: post #11

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.

As somebody in a family with bipolar I have to disagree. Someone's schizophrenic episodes should be taken into account in judging their actions, just as one's manic episodes should be as well. This in no way excuses their behavior. Whether or not you want to continue associating with that person is a different matter.

He's entitled to share his mitigating context. It may well be persuasively exculpatory for a lot of reasonable people. He goes far beyond that in this argument, suggesting that he would find dishonest any description of his misconduct that doesn't capture his full state of mind; for instance, any claim that he attempted to "cancel" Malcolm Harris.

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#49

Post by corndoge » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #11

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.

Intentional omissions of relevant facts constitute lies. Do you disagree with that or do you disagree that the facts are relevant? Or what?

Re: I would like closure, but I'll take honesty

#50

Post by watwut » Thu, Nov 18, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #39

tptacek wrote: post #11

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.

> 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 what conditions he's set, he's just asking people to include context. Context which completely changes how most people would view that incident. Maybe "unambiguously a lie" is a too strong and you can't tell a lie by taking an action out of context, but if you can thi…

> Maybe "unambiguously a lie" is a too strong

In many cases it is simply a lie - of the exact kind he complains about here.