body { -ms-overflow-style: scrollbar; overflow-y: scroll; overscroll-behavior-y: none; } .errorContainer { background-color: #FFF; color: #0F1419; max-width: 600px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 10%; font-family: Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; } .errorButton { margin: 3em 0; } .errorButton a { background: #1DA1F2; border-radius: 2.5em; color: white; padding: 1em 2em; text-decoration: none; } .errorButton a:hover, .errorButton a:focus { background: rgb(26, 145, 218); } .errorFooter { color: #657786; font-size: 80%; line-height: 1.5; padding: 1em 0; } .errorFooter a, .errorFooter a:visited { color: #657786; text-decoration: none; padding-right: 1em; } .errorFooter a:hover, .errorFooter a:active { text-decoration: underline; } #placeholder, #react-root { display: none !important; } body { background-color: #FFF !important; }

JavaScript is not available.

We’ve detected that JavaScript is disabled in this browser. Please enable JavaScript or switch to a supported browser to continue using twitter.com. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.

Terms of Service Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Imprint Ads info © 2023 Twitter, Inc.

Conversation

Some people talk very precisely - a sentence means exactly what they said, and they might not agree with a sentence worded slightly differently. Other people talk vaguely - a sentence means that all similar-sounding ideas are bundled into the same concept. 1/

33

61

649

I lean towards the first category, and will say isolated, accurate things. But if you use words vaguely, then you might think I'm implying something which, imo, I am very much *not* implying. I meant exactly what I said, and no I don't see how you got that conclusion from it. 2/

3

11

262

e.g., yeah, we should question all moral intuitions. All moral intuitions includes necrophilia, yes. No, questioning a moral intuition does not mean we are condoning the thing. It's possible to still dislike necrophilia *after* probing your moral intuitions. I'm questioning-

1

2

144

moral intuitions about necrophilia on principle, not because I am particularly interested in necrophilia, but only because of it's instance in the principle. Me saying "We should question moral intuitions around necrophilia" does NOT at all equal "Yeah necrophilia is awesome".

4

4

150

In my head this seems extremely clear and self evident, and it's pretty confusing to me how people continually don't seem to get this. They often describe me as a troll or attention seeker - no, I'm just on the autism spectrum and follow things through to their conclusions.

33

5

256

Replying to

Hi Aella, My sense is: 1) what we are willing to question is *usually* a decent indicator of what we think and where we might lean. 2) being penalized for questioning things is also part of how we *enforce* our morals. (Questioning is one step closer to permitting.) No? 1/2

1

Replying to

and

Thus: The ideal of moral-free truth-seeking dialogue—presumed in “free speech” circles and the likes— just doesn’t jibe with how humans, morals, and rhetoric *actually* work. (Disagree?) 2/2

1

Replying to

It doesn't jibe with how a lot of humans work, I agree, which is why I'm clarifying that I am operating on different rules and interpreting me according to your rules means you don't understand what I'm doing.

1

Replying to

Yes, I can believe some people operate on different premises. And some will misunderstand them. Just thought it might help to think through why others don’t operate this way. (And don’t like it when some of us do.)

2

Replying to

I still had an hope that people would understand that sometimes people *are* just being precise, that this is hypothetically possible, and that using the vague worldview is inappropriate in some circumstances. Like, often people get mad at me when I say a thing, and

1

1

Replying to

and

then I figure okay - if I just explain to them that no, I'm not doing the vague worldview thing, and i do agree with other points of theirs, maybe even the full conclusion, then they'll realize that no I'm not actually a moral threat here.

9:51 PM · Dec 2, 2020