Perfect encapsulation of a point widely missed: *Understanding* is not the same thing as *advocating for*. (aka the naturalistic fallacy) Indeed, we need to try to understand humanity’s worst motives, our ugliest behaviors, in order to have a better chance of minimizing them.https://twitter.com/mindrelic/status/1138499270162767873 …
-
-
This is far from a pointless argument, it's one of the most intriguing topics right now. A few nuanced interpretations of key words exponentially distorts the discussion. A man said he would associate with bad people if that was the only safe place. But happy birthday.
-
Yes, this is the central point. How is one supposed to discuss one’s internal temptations and perceptions if that discussion is immediately turned into accusations concerning overly-broad mischaracterizations of intent? Answer: Here on Twitter, you can’t.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
lol, no shit. That is why I began by applying it to myself as well. But I’m not attempting to characterize your intentions, merely pointing out that you’ve imposed the frame of your interpretation upon his intent in a manner that implies your interpretation readily generalizes.
-
And that at least one person, namely me, did not interpret what he said in a manner congruent with your generalization. Following this logic, it’s often constructive to avoid over-generalizing one’s own interpretation beyond the limits of perspectival acknowledgement.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.