3 ms·
> You are arbitrarily picking this as an example of being right because it was done this way in the past. Off topic: the opposite fallacy is called "chronologi
by maest 6y ago
> You are arbitrarily picking this as an example of being right because it was done this way in the past.
Off topic: the opposite fallacy is called "chronological snobbery"[0]. I guess this could be called "historical snobbery"?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_snobbery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_snobbery
- buran77 6y agoWhat civilizations did for ages has no bearing whatsoever on whether that was good or bad, either then or now. Not in and of itself. So I just took a hammer to the foundation of OP's statement. My argument was that it was always done like that due to lack of a better choice. Money aside almost everyone would choose better. As someone who lived in those conditions, surrounded by people in the same situation, I can say nobody wanted to live with 3 generations under the same roof. The lack of privacy, of space, the conflicts you can typically get from so many views cramped together, and all the social dynamics within that group are definitely not something to romanticize unless you've never actually lived it like most people did. It's easy to assume living in your parents' 6 bedroom house (or with the in-laws in the guest house of a 3000sqft main house, and the parents a mile away like one commenter though is a similar enough situation to the topic) is how "every civilization has done it" so far. Perhaps those insisting it's great (or that they're always right) might want to try it for themselves, the way those civilizations were actually doing it.