zlacker

[return to "Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction"]
1. karate+mh[view] [source] 2022-07-28 00:16:41
>>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.
◧◩
2. clairi+gi[view] [source] 2022-07-28 00:23:52
>>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.
◧◩◪
3. karate+jk[view] [source] 2022-07-28 00:42:08
>>clairi+gi
If you've got an opinion on some issue, especially a strong one, then you're on a side, and there is an 'other'. Be careful not to conflate a sense of your own independence with a sense of your own lack of biases or immunity to human irrationality.
◧◩◪◨
4. clairi+yr[view] [source] 2022-07-28 01:48:07
>>karate+jk
no, you don't have to think in sides. you can have a position and discuss your position with others. you don't have to think of them as your enemy, but rather your conversation partner, someone who can help you expand your perspective and perhaps even change your mind.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. int_19+kz[view] [source] 2022-07-28 02:54:08
>>clairi+yr
At the end of the day, all those discussions still result in actual decisions. In some cases, those decisions affect people in a very negative way. Given that, why shouldn't one see someone advocating for decisions that will negatively affect them as an enemy?
[go to top]