3 ms·

> If you adhere to the view that Nobody Is Truly Bad I do. It is their actions and ideas that are bad. Even if you do not agree with me, I think it is import

> If you adhere to the view that Nobody Is Truly Bad I do. It is their actions and ideas that are bad. Even if you do not agree with me, I think it is important to show others trust until you have a real reason not to. What the "Us vs. Them" attitude does is ignore the potential for people in the "Them" group to have anything of value to the "Us" group, or the potential for both groups to work together.

anigbrowl 9y ago
OK, but I'm talking about those cases where people have already provided reasons not to trust them. And I don't mean people who are affiliated with their group by default, such as people who happen to have been born in North Korea and whose opposition to the United States is thus an inherited position, but people who choose to affiliate with other actors. Put another way, sure, people are products of their circumstances to some extent, but they do also have agency, and insofar as they choose to be aggressive I consider them 'bad people' until they abandon such choices.
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  > OK, but I'm talking about those cases where people have already provided reasons not to trust them. That's perfectly reasonable. I was still focused on the "Us vs. Them" attitude, which doesn't apply here. If you haven't met or interacted with someone, but you choose to categorize that person in the "Them" group, that is unreasonable. It can be tricky when individuals seem to put themselves in your "Them" group. When that happens, it's probably a good idea to stop, and take care to define what "Them" entails, and how that individual fits there. If you don't, that person may be unjustly labeled by you, and you by them. When we label each other, and create meta-groups to dislike, that creates a divide that isn't helpful for either side, because each side is mischaracterized, and all nuance is ignored. > until they abandon such choices My advice is to be careful not to judge others solely by the things you dislike about them. The details you focus on are not the entirety of their character. If someone only finds friendship in a group that promotes ideas that you are opposed to, that person is likely to promote those ideas. If you befriend that person, you can begin on common ground, and work together toward ideas that you agree to be worthwhile. That person will thereby have less focus on the idea you don't like. None of us is perfect, and we can certainly all find faults in one another. If we all reject others for the faults we find in them, we will all be rejected.

anigbrowl 9y ago

OK, but I'm talking about those cases where people have already provided reasons not to trust them. And I don't mean people who are affiliated with their group by default, such as people who happen to have been born in North Korea and whose opposition to the United States is thus an inherited position, but people who choose to affiliate with other actors. Put another way, sure, people are products of their circumstances to some extent, but they do also have agency, and insofar as they choose to be aggressive I consider them 'bad people' until they abandon such choices.

thomastjeffery 9y ago
> OK, but I'm talking about those cases where people have already provided reasons not to trust them. That's perfectly reasonable. I was still focused on the "Us vs. Them" attitude, which doesn't apply here. If you haven't met or interacted with someone, but you choose to categorize that person in the "Them" group, that is unreasonable. It can be tricky when individuals seem to put themselves in your "Them" group. When that happens, it's probably a good idea to stop, and take care to define what "Them" entails, and how that individual fits there. If you don't, that person may be unjustly labeled by you, and you by them. When we label each other, and create meta-groups to dislike, that creates a divide that isn't helpful for either side, because each side is mischaracterized, and all nuance is ignored. > until they abandon such choices My advice is to be careful not to judge others solely by the things you dislike about them. The details you focus on are not the entirety of their character. If someone only finds friendship in a group that promotes ideas that you are opposed to, that person is likely to promote those ideas. If you befriend that person, you can begin on common ground, and work together toward ideas that you agree to be worthwhile. That person will thereby have less focus on the idea you don't like. None of us is perfect, and we can certainly all find faults in one another. If we all reject others for the faults we find in them, we will all be rejected.