TYTY, Steve. Another *great* one. Actually, two. That article on Medium was 100%, AFAIK. And You clearly pointed out the fallacies in N's approach. He "said":
"my mental health would be wayyyy better if it were easy to live perfectly in line with my values and also if my values were all perfectly consistent and stable."
TYTY, Steve. Another *great* one. Actually, two. That article on Medium was 100%, AFAIK. And You clearly pointed out the fallacies in N's approach. He "said":
"my mental health would be wayyyy better if it were easy to live perfectly in line with my values and also if my values were all perfectly consistent and stable."
Perfection being unattainable, and confessing I can be pretty lazy myself, this about says it all. The Mahatma said (to the effect), "Happiness is when what You think and what You say and what You do are all the same thing." You identified the problem clearly, and that's when people believe "It's not hypocritical if I don't practice what I preach."
It appeared to me that N's arguments were trying to deflect from the FACT You pointed out again and again:
"But while it’s way easier (and faster), to dehumanise people than it is to persuade them, all this does is drive them further away."
I dunno if this is the exception that proves the rule, of if this is the rule. But You've mentioned previously that Darryl <can't recall last name> from FAIR deradicalized KKK people. From what I know, it was 1000% compassion and persuasion.
Small point: Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there. But that's just me. TY again, Sir!
"Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there."
Yeah, good point about "saving" people, the whole notion is condescending and arrogant. And yes, N was determined to present reasonable people as these strange abberations who found it effortless to interact fairy with people they disagreed with. Saints who it was unreasonable to expect her to ever emulate. Which is why she kept talking about "perfection."
It's just an excuse to indulge her "fighty" side whenever she wants to vent her unhappiness on "the bad guys." These simplistic polarised concepts of "good people" and "bad people" are often used in that way to be honest. As Dave says above, it's easier to justify being cruel to people once you've dehumanised them.
TYTY, Steve. Another *great* one. Actually, two. That article on Medium was 100%, AFAIK. And You clearly pointed out the fallacies in N's approach. He "said":
"my mental health would be wayyyy better if it were easy to live perfectly in line with my values and also if my values were all perfectly consistent and stable."
Perfection being unattainable, and confessing I can be pretty lazy myself, this about says it all. The Mahatma said (to the effect), "Happiness is when what You think and what You say and what You do are all the same thing." You identified the problem clearly, and that's when people believe "It's not hypocritical if I don't practice what I preach."
It appeared to me that N's arguments were trying to deflect from the FACT You pointed out again and again:
"But while it’s way easier (and faster), to dehumanise people than it is to persuade them, all this does is drive them further away."
I dunno if this is the exception that proves the rule, of if this is the rule. But You've mentioned previously that Darryl <can't recall last name> from FAIR deradicalized KKK people. From what I know, it was 1000% compassion and persuasion.
Small point: Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there. But that's just me. TY again, Sir!
"Where N says You're preaching to the choir, the choir being "people who are already wholly invested in being, or at least backing, someone who saves others through reason and compassion." I think this whole notion of saving people is one-a the biggest problems out there."
Yeah, good point about "saving" people, the whole notion is condescending and arrogant. And yes, N was determined to present reasonable people as these strange abberations who found it effortless to interact fairy with people they disagreed with. Saints who it was unreasonable to expect her to ever emulate. Which is why she kept talking about "perfection."
It's just an excuse to indulge her "fighty" side whenever she wants to vent her unhappiness on "the bad guys." These simplistic polarised concepts of "good people" and "bad people" are often used in that way to be honest. As Dave says above, it's easier to justify being cruel to people once you've dehumanised them.
That last is sad, but true Sir. (Well, whole post was. :-)