|
Post by tannhauser42 on Dec 27, 2020 21:03:07 GMT -5
Some good news, at least: Trump signed the spending bill and covid relief, so no government shutdown. Of course, the bad news is that it was even a possibility he wouldn't in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 27, 2020 22:01:51 GMT -5
You know how I made that thread about the purpose and nature of free speech a few months ago? Yeah, that Dakka threat is a prime example of why.
|
|
|
Post by Hordini on Dec 27, 2020 22:08:30 GMT -5
You know how I made that thread about the purpose and nature of free speech a few months ago? Yeah, that Dakka threat is a prime example of why. Are people saying things in the Dakka thread that you don't think they should be allowed to say? If so, what? (Just curious - I haven't read the whole thread).
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 27, 2020 22:39:25 GMT -5
Not things I don't think they shouldn't be allowed to say, but there should be consequences for wilfully representing the arguments one does not agree with. No one in the thread is claiming that playing 40k will turn you into a fascist, so hyperbolically comparing to the DnD scare of the 80s is just meaningless drivel. Similarly, the whole tangent from the new guy on "Marxism" was a colossal waste of space for everyone involved, and I don't see how it would have hurt anyone to simply remove it and give the guy a slap on the wrist for being stupid in a public place.
EDIT: He also gets extra bonus points in advanced Dunning Kruger-y for calling the paradox of tolerance "drivel".
|
|
|
Post by hatoflords on Dec 28, 2020 2:24:01 GMT -5
EDIT: He also gets extra bonus points in advanced Dunning Kruger-y for calling the paradox of tolerance "drivel". I mean, I would call it drivel but I suspect for completely different reasons.
At the core of the very concept of tolerance is compassion. I find myself annoyed at the paradox of tolerance concept (as described by Popper), not because it's a worthless debate-it's a good exercise for intelligent discussion-but because the argument is largely semantics and typically devolves into sophistry. I think it's more productive to talk about the paradox of compassion, namely if we take compassion for others as a good thing and something we want as a corner of society, at what point do we cease being compassionate for a point of view that differs from our own and what do we do in response to inhumane positions and what constitutes an inhuman position in the first place.
The paradox of tolerance is a fun little game of wordplay, but it distracts from the actual end goal (how to produce a 'tolerant' society) more than it helps. In that sense, I would definitely call it drivel. Part of this may be driven by my own exhaustion with braindead arguments over how no one is tolerant so long as they are 'intolerant of intolerance' which is the height of not having two brain cells to rub together. There is no one who argues for a tolerant society who is naive enough to think tolerance equates to passivity in the face of intolerance, and more often than not this semantic argument is just an exercise in straw men someone who expressed an uncompassionate and callous opinion throws out to avoid being criticized. It's a stupid game with stupid prizes.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 28, 2020 4:24:25 GMT -5
I disagree. There's plenty of people who will attack intolerance of intolerance as hypocrisy ("so much for the tolerant left" and similar sentiments); I see the popularisation of Popper's paradox of tolerance as a way to rebut such "arguments" (which is a generous description) by pointing out that lawful good isn't lawful stupid.
As for the question of when we should stop being compassionate I'd argue THAT is drivel because the obvious answer is "never". Compassion does not equate to endorsement, but it is absolutely essential to understanding motivation. Being compassionate towards an axe murderer does not entail letting him continue axe murdering people (sorry Khârn).
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Dec 28, 2020 6:07:20 GMT -5
I agree with walrus. Sometimes the compassionate action to take is the one where you are intolerant of someone's actions as that can provide the best outcome for everyone.
Some serial killers provide an extreme example, where we do not tolerate their killing but do show compassion for the person because we understand that they have an urge to kill beyond their control. So instead of executing them or locking them up in standard prisons we incarcerate them in specialist secure hospitals where we can attempt to identify the root causes of their compulsions and then attempt to treat them.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 28, 2020 9:02:53 GMT -5
That thread really is a parody at this point, isn't it?
"There's no problem with far-right views in the 40k community. Rhodesians were bravely resisting communism!"
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Dec 28, 2020 9:59:34 GMT -5
Well, what's to expect from a person that insists that the Imperium is right because they're humans, and therefore can do no wrong. Seems like a slippery slope into othering between humans or nations.
Still, at least its not the QAR parody of trying to convince everyone that fascists should have a place in the hobby to avoid "ideologically purifying" the fascists.
Clearly the hobby community is doing a-OK, what do us lefties know?
|
|
|
Post by tannhauser42 on Dec 28, 2020 10:10:35 GMT -5
I applaud y'all for actually reading that thread. I skimmed the first post after you linked it here and noped right out of it, knowing where that thread would go. I want to keep what few functioning braincells I have left.
|
|
|
Post by hatoflords on Dec 28, 2020 10:16:26 GMT -5
I disagree. There's plenty of people who will attack intolerance of intolerance as hypocrisy ("so much for the tolerant left" and similar sentiments); I see the popularisation of Popper's paradox of tolerance as a way to rebut such "arguments" (which is a generous description) by pointing out that lawful good isn't lawful stupid. I think this tracks in theory.
In practice my experience is that it does not work out this way at all. I'm not arguing there aren't people who make that stupid argument. There's too many. I think though that the focus on the 'tolerance' part of the paradox of tolerance is a trap too many people fall into. People who are not articulate enough to express their reasoning (or intelligent enough to even understand it and are just repeating what others have said, sometimes poorly) are a dime a dozen. This honestly goes back to my opinion that voters are stupid animals and it's not just when they're voting.
Plenty of people are capable of understanding the underlying concept while having no capability to express that understanding. The paradox of tolerance compounds on the issue because the words themselves become jumbled as someone tries to explain/think their way through them. I like the lawful good isn't lawful stupid analogy. It's way easier to understand and explain than the paradox of tolerance while reaching the same desired result. Being tolerant doesn't necessitate shutting up every time some idiot says something fascistic or racist or sexist or what have you.
As for the compassion argument, I'd point out I specifically said 'point of view.' I'm saying there's a point where an opinion or position ceases to be one that we should express any sort of sympathy or understanding for. Nazism for example. I think once a ideology has reached the point of advocating genocide, you'd basically have to be advocating genocide to disagree that there shouldn't be any extra commiseration given. This is not a position where someone should get a pat on the back or 'I appreciate your position' response. Though I guess this does show that compassion isn't any less jumbling than tolerance. Just invites a whole different slew of semantic confusions cause I don't think we actually disagree with the underlying notions involved here, just the expression.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Dec 28, 2020 12:47:46 GMT -5
People are actually crossing the line from being mealy mouthed apologists to coming out of the closet as fascists. Fucking hell, this is the single best thread on Dakka to prove that yes, sometimes the poster is the real problem, not the topic.
|
|
|
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Dec 28, 2020 13:01:48 GMT -5
I'm surprised it's remained open this long.
|
|
|
Post by semipotentwalrus on Dec 28, 2020 13:08:44 GMT -5
Aaaand it's gone.
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Dec 28, 2020 13:16:40 GMT -5
I'm surprised it's remained open this long. Now we can go back to pretending all this wasn't just said by some people and live in perfect harmony, harmony like an awkward family Thanksgiving/Christmas dinner with the obviously racist uncle.
|
|