And so then there's a need to decide what your essential goals are and what will best achieve them.
-
-
Replying to @HPluckrose
But a sole focus on that leads to the abandonment of principles & then there's no possibility of ethically worthwhile outcomes.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
So needs to be a balance in which you have strong principles & good arguments for them but don't always need everyone to be fully on board
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
every step of the way. Providing you share the key principles. Being OK with ppl coming at the same thing from a different angle can be hard
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
For me, anyway. I always want to explain to people in great detail exactly why they are wrong about something until they get it.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
But this is the fatal flaw of the ideologue who demands purity & will sabotage their own goals in demanding it.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
It should be enough to say 'I disagree with you on that but let's focus on the problem we both see' in very many cases.
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
I once found common ground with an Islamic feminist because we both wanted legal gender equality but had different justifications for this.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Not that different tho. She said 'Allah is just. Gender inequality is unjust. Therefore it is against the will of God.'
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose
Except gender inequality is hard coded in to the words of Allah. But it allows proper use of the oft misused phrase, "begs the question."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
-
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.