She says some familiar nonsense about how the “theme” of On the Road is about being on the road etc. The teacher makes fun of her. Finally, more honestly, Kim says that she hated the book, couldn’t get through it, the author was “cleary on drugs”, etc.
-
-
like "it's pointless to argue about the academic/theoretical versions of political opinions, because ~nobody holds them, they hold simpler and dumber positions; people hold dumb positions because of real concerns plus misunderstandings/ignorance/internal limits"
-
I think it can be fun and you can maybe find your people by doing it. And maybe you. Sn even fund a think tank and influence policy on the margin or whatever. But today I’m more interested in the thing that prevents people from understanding the basic argument.
- 36 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
That is totally one point! I think Ozy makes it well in the blog post I linked. But I like “true” steelmanning as a two-way cooperative process a LOT. My point is more that “steelmanning” as a route to justice can destroy discourse. I don’t totally know what my point is.
-
destroy discourse like...Lindsey's muddying the waters by pretending she and Kim are on the same "side", and now third parties could get confused?
- 1 more reply
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.