6 ms·

Assuming that your enemy is crazy is just intellectual lazyness. If you can't explain the behaviour of your enemy then it's probably because your understanding

by JBSay 9y ago

Assuming that your enemy is crazy is just intellectual lazyness. If you can't explain the behaviour of your enemy then it's probably because your understanding of his motives is lacking.

notacoward 9y ago
Assuming that your enemy is crazy is intellectual laziness. However, there really are crazy people in the world. Some occupy positions of power. Do you deny either part of that? When the craziness is thoroughly proven it's not lazy to recognize it. You know what is lazy? Assuming that someone's not crazy, or assuming that an interlocutor is jumping to conclusions. Turn that lens on yourself first, not last.
- awptimus 9y ago
  "Crazy" suffices to say that the behavior set is far outside of regular norms as to be unworkable with normal reason. It doesn't have to imply the actor is schizophrenic or anything. It doesn't matter if the actor, behaving rationally towards his ends, has ends that are absolutely incompatible with ours, or if he's acting irrationally. [edit: I mean it doesn't matter from a defense of his behavior standpoint. It's fine to call him "crazy" if his ends are absolutely unacceptable] I agree with the critique of the piece - no one thinks North Koreans are inferior as human beings. We think they've been fed a ubiquitous dose of propaganda their entire lives. We think that a dictator, so very isolated through years of behavior that necessitates (and invites) it, lacks any sense of acceptable end-states for his country. I also agree that it's misguided to dismiss him as actually crazy. One must treat him as a rational actor - moves you make will have moves he makes. There is rationality involved. May be shitty rationality, may be myopic rationality, but it's rationality. You move warships towards North Korea he's not going going to launch Rubber Ducks at you. That'd be crazy. He's not going to poop his pants and eat the feces on live television and announce he's a little princess.
  - notacoward 9y ago
    Don't try the "excluded middle" trick on me. Rationality is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Literally nobody is 100% rational or 100% irrational. The question is where the balance lies; "crazy" is an apt term for someone who is only rational in limited ways or for a small percentage of the time.
    - awptimus 9y ago
      I ain't try any trick yo
- JBSay 9y ago
  Few irrational people attain position of power and even fewer retain it. The conquest and perpetuation of power requires rationality and the ability to strategize. You are the one making claims thus the burden of proof is on you. What proof do you have that the NK leadership is crazy? Because the media and the US government says so? Have you ever tried to put yourself in their shoes and identify their motives? How do you know their behaviour is not a rational strategy to perpetuate their regime for as long as possible?
  - notacoward 9y ago
    > Few irrational people attain position of power and even fewer retain it. Few overall, but if there were zero the world might be a much happier place than it actually is. Given the effect that such people have, even that small number is significant, and the numbers get larger among children of dictators whose parents bequeathed them a massive security apparatus. > the burden of proof is on you Um, no, it's on the OP and anyone who takes their side. That's how this really works.
    - JBSay 9y ago
      > the numbers get larger among children of dictators whose parents bequeathed them a massive security apparatus Except his predecessors all had exactly the same behaviour. So either they were all crazy yet managed to build that massive security apparatus and perpetuate their regime. Or, more likely, you have never bothered to put yourself in their shoes to consider that this might be their optimal strategy (hint: Irak, Libya, Syria). You claimed earlier to have proofs that the NK leadership is crazy. Where are they?
      - notacoward 9y ago
        > You claimed earlier to have proofs that the NK leadership is crazy. Where are they? http://www.allday.com/kim-jong-il-never-pooped-and-other-crazy-things-north-korea-tells-its--2180804246.html http://www.allday.com/kim-jong-il-never-pooped-and-other-cra... Do you deny that these sorts of claims are made, or that they're just a bit delusional? Also, BTW, did you really create an account only to argue on behalf of Kim Jong-Un? How interesting.
bryanlarsen 9y ago
I've never heard the media describe the leadership of North Korea as crazy. However, they repeatedly use the word 'unpredictable'. They apply that same word to Trump.
- notacoward 9y ago
  Is that because the term applies to neither, or to both?

by JBSay 9y ago

Assuming that your enemy is crazy is just intellectual lazyness. If you can't explain the behaviour of your enemy then it's probably because your understanding of his motives is lacking.

notacoward 9y ago

Assuming that your enemy is crazy is intellectual laziness. However, there really are crazy people in the world. Some occupy positions of power. Do you deny either part of that? When the craziness is thoroughly proven it's not lazy to recognize it. You know what is lazy? Assuming that someone's not crazy, or assuming that an interlocutor is jumping to conclusions. Turn that lens on yourself first, not last.

awptimus 9y ago
"Crazy" suffices to say that the behavior set is far outside of regular norms as to be unworkable with normal reason. It doesn't have to imply the actor is schizophrenic or anything. It doesn't matter if the actor, behaving rationally towards his ends, has ends that are absolutely incompatible with ours, or if he's acting irrationally. [edit: I mean it doesn't matter from a defense of his behavior standpoint. It's fine to call him "crazy" if his ends are absolutely unacceptable] I agree with the critique of the piece - no one thinks North Koreans are inferior as human beings. We think they've been fed a ubiquitous dose of propaganda their entire lives. We think that a dictator, so very isolated through years of behavior that necessitates (and invites) it, lacks any sense of acceptable end-states for his country. I also agree that it's misguided to dismiss him as actually crazy. One must treat him as a rational actor - moves you make will have moves he makes. There is rationality involved. May be shitty rationality, may be myopic rationality, but it's rationality. You move warships towards North Korea he's not going going to launch Rubber Ducks at you. That'd be crazy. He's not going to poop his pants and eat the feces on live television and announce he's a little princess.
- notacoward 9y ago
  Don't try the "excluded middle" trick on me. Rationality is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Literally nobody is 100% rational or 100% irrational. The question is where the balance lies; "crazy" is an apt term for someone who is only rational in limited ways or for a small percentage of the time.
  - awptimus 9y ago
    I ain't try any trick yo
JBSay 9y ago
Few irrational people attain position of power and even fewer retain it. The conquest and perpetuation of power requires rationality and the ability to strategize. You are the one making claims thus the burden of proof is on you. What proof do you have that the NK leadership is crazy? Because the media and the US government says so? Have you ever tried to put yourself in their shoes and identify their motives? How do you know their behaviour is not a rational strategy to perpetuate their regime for as long as possible?
- notacoward 9y ago
  > Few irrational people attain position of power and even fewer retain it. Few overall, but if there were zero the world might be a much happier place than it actually is. Given the effect that such people have, even that small number is significant, and the numbers get larger among children of dictators whose parents bequeathed them a massive security apparatus. > the burden of proof is on you Um, no, it's on the OP and anyone who takes their side. That's how this really works.
  - JBSay 9y ago
    > the numbers get larger among children of dictators whose parents bequeathed them a massive security apparatus Except his predecessors all had exactly the same behaviour. So either they were all crazy yet managed to build that massive security apparatus and perpetuate their regime. Or, more likely, you have never bothered to put yourself in their shoes to consider that this might be their optimal strategy (hint: Irak, Libya, Syria). You claimed earlier to have proofs that the NK leadership is crazy. Where are they?
    - notacoward 9y ago
      > You claimed earlier to have proofs that the NK leadership is crazy. Where are they? http://www.allday.com/kim-jong-il-never-pooped-and-other-crazy-things-north-korea-tells-its--2180804246.html http://www.allday.com/kim-jong-il-never-pooped-and-other-cra... Do you deny that these sorts of claims are made, or that they're just a bit delusional? Also, BTW, did you really create an account only to argue on behalf of Kim Jong-Un? How interesting.

bryanlarsen 9y ago

I've never heard the media describe the leadership of North Korea as crazy. However, they repeatedly use the word 'unpredictable'. They apply that same word to Trump.

notacoward 9y ago
Is that because the term applies to neither, or to both?