4 ms·
Its the difference between a history book with the tone of "then the evil nazis who were the spawn of satan did this and caused suffering because they're evil n
by vokep 6y ago
Its the difference between a history book with the tone of "then the evil nazis who were the spawn of satan did this and caused suffering because they're evil nazis"
as opposed to
"then the nazis did this and caused a significant degree of suffering widely regarded in the forthcoming decades as among if not the most evil acts ever committed"
The difference is taking things personally, as opposed to a third person observational perspective. Both may come to the same conclusion, but one is hoping you'll be convinced while the other just represents what is known about the reality in question, letting the meaning of it speak for itself. There is even inclusion of opinion, but not personally taken, just noted as occurring.
- noxer 6y agoCorrect.. BUT whoever bring up the nazis first loses the argument sorry ;)
- arcticbull 6y agoYou're not wrong :) that's my fault. I was hoping to find something pretty uncontentious.
- JetSpiegel 6y ago> widely regarded[1] By whom? Weasel words. Are the Nazi's actions bad only because of the "widely opinion" other people held?
- parliament32 6y agoThe keyword is "evil", which is subjective, therefore an opinion. A Nazi Officer, for example, would disagree with your opinion whether what they did was evil.