zlacker

>>Mayson+(OP)
Before making moral evaluations, it's really useful to look at these situations, and try to automatically reverse the "polarity" of the actors involved. If you see people doing something and you think they're on your side, imagine a similar scenario in which people are taking the same actions for a cause you are violently opposed to, or on behalf of a group you find deplorable. And vice versa. This helps reduce the chances you'll get confused and take a hypocritical position.

>>karate+mh
or even simpler, stop being on a side, then you don't have to do mental tricks like "reversing the polarity". you can just see things for the way they are, without personal identity invested in the situation. this is exactly what being independent is.

>>clairi+gi
This isn't just partisan "sides." It's also sides of specific legal questions.

I don't think "just stop picking a side regarding abortion, gun ownership, or gay marriage" is a reasonable solution. These are political wedge issues, but they are also legal questions with answers that can affect your daily life. Of course you want it to go a certain way!

>>notrid+fl
no, stop thinking of sides at all, and especially don't start with a side first. start with reasoned first principles (the constitution is a good start) and continue to reason your way to a position on any given issue that is consistent with those first principles, sides be damned. the only reason you pay attention to sides is identifying with and wanting to defend a side in the first place. don't worry about defending and entrenching. have earnest conversations. if your position is constantly getting barraged with hard-to-argue counterpoints, then consider changing your position. it's not that hard.

>>clairi+Sp
I like actually thinking about things, but does that address the problem where you’re more likely to see people who disagree with your (well-reasoned) opinion as violent?

>>notrid+fv
it takes some mental fortitude to maintain this position, but you have to understand that 99.99% of the time, those other people think of themselves as good and reasonable too. and the feeling of violence is a direct result of identifying with your chosen "side", thus feeling personally affronted. rather, you can create space between who you are and what you believe, and in this way, someone can attack those beliefs without it affecting who you think you are. you don't feel it's violent against you because of that separation. you can similarly project that separation onto other people, so that you're not attacking them personally, but just discussing their ideas and beliefs.

>>clairi+Px
Unfortunately, it’s easy to bury your feelings and convince yourself that you’re looking at things impartially, even when you’re actually not.

>>notrid+Ty
this is true, but that's even moreso why we need to have such conversations openly, especially with people different from us, to elucidate our blind spots.

and that's the crux of why diversity can be powerful. it's not about diversity of demographics, but diversity of perspective and thinking that strengthens societies (and companies and teams).