zlacker

[return to "Charlie Kirk killed at event in Utah"]
1. loughn+Bg1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 02:37:24
>>david9+(OP)
The sad irony is that he's at a college campus debating/arguing with people. At their best that's what college campuses are for. I know they haven't been living up to it lately but seeing him gunned down feels like a metaphor.

I know he liked to publicize the exchanges where he got the best of someone, and bury the others, and that he was a far, far cry from a public intellectual. Still, he talked to folks about ideas, and that's something that we should have more of.

That should be something that we strive for, but I fear we'll see it less and less. Who'se going to want to go around and argue with people now?

◧◩
2. cosmic+np1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 03:55:05
>>loughn+Bg1
I read an account of the "debate" immediately preceding his murder, it was quips and dodges. If that's at all representative of his conduct, he actively hurt the national dialogue by convincing people that that's what a debate looks like.
◧◩◪
3. dnissl+rs1[view] [source] 2025-09-11 04:33:33
>>cosmic+np1
how would you steelman his position?
◧◩◪◨
4. jennyh+1q2[view] [source] 2025-09-11 13:37:43
>>dnissl+rs1
I've never heard of the "steelman" thought experiment

I'm familiar with the "strawman" concept that it derives from, although in my experience this is typically presented as a logical fallacy.

What is the purpose of "steelmanning" a political actor's political perspectives?

What is this supposed to achieve?

Where did you and the people responding to this comment hear about this concept? Are there articles out there making the case for "steelmanning"?

[go to top]