No post body was provided.
Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
51–60 of 388 posts
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#52Titles like this irk me. It clearly isn’t It should be something more like: “how has general discourse become so polluted and toxified in its perceptions for it to appear that the following statement yields any factuality” … I guess that doesn’t quite have the same ring to it though.
Titles like this drive me nuts. Trying to start a conversation with a question that assumes a false premise reminds me of the way threads on 4chan are started. I get that headlines are supposed to be attention grabby, but using annoyance to attract attention is insufferably obnoxious.
see also: 'When are you going to stop beating your wife?'
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#53Morality and law both work like mathematics. This means that my beliefs are constructed, and once I have a construction, the only in bounds way to convince me to change my mind about them is to show me that my beliefs are inconsistent. Moreover, understanding someone who has already demonstrated an inconsistent belief system is easy. They believe X because they believe something and its negation, and at least one of those implies X. Trying to unravel exactly how they have managed to go from an inconsistency to whatever thing they want to believe isn't really that interesting or important. The point is that their entire moral philosophy is broken and is exclusively used to justify whatever they want. This is why you have things like the prosperity doctrine.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
You failed at understanding the author.
I don't think factual inaccuracies should get a free pass under the principle of assuming good faith, because the principle of assuming good faith only applies to how ambiguous claims should be construed. There is no way to construe "the constitution does not mention privacy" as a correct statement.
Op is saying there is no factual inaccuracy though. And I agree with him.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not fair. Those extremists are succeeding in pushing their agenda.
Show me a law on the books in any state that would outlaw abortion in the case of rape. Obviously it would be a "trigger law" since states can't actually have such a law right now, but no such law exists as far as I'm aware. Unless you can do that, it's not fair to claim that those extremists are succeeding in pushing anything. Edit: I'm not going to individually address all of the dishonest rhetoric from the article…
Probably 8 or 10 states are ready to push extreme abortion laws. DeSantis has one on his desk ready to sign as soon as RvW is overturned (probably this week).
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#56Titles like this irk me. It clearly isn’t It should be something more like: “how has general discourse become so polluted and toxified in its perceptions for it to appear that the following statement yields any factuality” … I guess that doesn’t quite have the same ring to it though.
Become? I think one could argue it's less so than ever. Remember blasphemy and the inquisition? Do you think people were more tolerant prior to the 20th century, what about in the 1950s? I think until recently responses were pretty violent in some cases and could lead to quite some consequences. I don't really know, but I think it's worth considering.
Blasphemy is alive and well!
Try saying you doubt the safety and effectiveness of COVID vaccines.
The reaction is the same.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#57I do not know what I expected when I clicked on the comments section. I think the author makes some really good points about human psychology & game theory, and the fact that people are immediately riled up by his statements only serves to prove him right.
You can only understand people when you're clear-headed, i.e. your "rational you" is the one in control. With these issues, people have either natural or nurtured emotional ties. To such an extent that the topic itself shuts of their rationality, and they revert back to blanket statements ("I can't argue with you because you believe X", or just plain profanities). Mix this in with tribality, and you've got a good recipe for no ability to reconcile two different opinions.
There's also the fact that people generally don't want to reconcile. When it comes to charged topics, it is a bare-faced lie to want reconciliation. What each side wants is the other side to relent. I think the term "culture war" is actually pretty accurate, there's no interchange of ideas. It's just seeing who can shout the other into submission.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#58Titles like this irk me. It clearly isn’t It should be something more like: “how has general discourse become so polluted and toxified in its perceptions for it to appear that the following statement yields any factuality” … I guess that doesn’t quite have the same ring to it though.
It's almost as if an entire platform is built on making sure the arguments are misconstrued and using buzz phrases like "science believer" and "anti-vaxer". It completely destroys what actual argument exists because it's using targeted language.
It's subversive and a direct influence on how politics are taken. You can be against unnecessary medication and be called an anti-vaxer. You can doubt a scientific conclusion without being anti-science.
You just cannot defend yourself against these accusations because they're triggers which purposely end discussions. These phrases are directly linked to terms which are generally universally agreed upon to be good natured. "Safe", "experts", "effective", "empathetic".
It's an attack on the language so that discourse is controlled and effectively one sided.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#59> There’s a certain phenomenon I often wonder about, one that only seems to occur with culture war topics. I mean, the term "culture war" itself is part of the "conservative" vocabulary in that issue. So I can see why the whole thing is not easy.
That's your own characterization, and not universal. I've personally seen the term more often in non-conservative forums and circles. Not that it matters to your point, which I get and agree with.
Regarding this phenomenon, it may be that you don't see that term in conservative forums because they don't want to use it, whether because it telegraphs their intent or they don't want to use the same words as liberals (this increasingly drastic polarization of language is a key point of Lingua Tertii Imperii... A book I started reading before 2015 and had to quit reading because frankly it bothered me how much it started to resemble current times in the US). So its absence isn't altogether surprising.
Re: Why is it traitorous to understand the people you disagree with?
#60No post body was provided.