Never attribute to intellectual dishonesty that which is adequately explained by mistake.
-
-
-
I see this a lot. 'You're only saying that because you're motivated by this.' Better to assume people are sincere but mistaken & explain why
-
Assuming dishonesty wrongly loses an opportunity to change minds. Assuming sincerity wrongly wastes only a little time. Gullibility>cynicism
-
In the same way, I would draw a careful distinction between hypocrisy & inconsistency. The first is knowing, the second might not be.
-
This might be a semantic quibble but I know I'd respond more positively to being told I'm being inconsistent than being told I'm a hypocrite
-
Because I know I'm not a hypocrite. I absolutely think I am being consistent. I also know I have been mistaken about that at times.
-
If you'd speak with
@SamHarrisOrg on his podcast, what would you think to be the most likely ideas of disagreement? -
I keep thinking I disagree with Sam Harris but on reading his rationale, I find I don't. Guns, maybe?
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I believe that could succinctly be called: being charitable to others' views.
-
Yes. I don't really do succinct. Here I am saying this at great length.pic.twitter.com/Vh0qzFJex3
-
That's okay. Often a pithy or laconic line works well as a final reminder of the point, but lands better if primed by a longer argument.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Why is it named "razor"? Like Occums?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.