3 ms·
OP writes: > We just assume we're right. And you follow up by proving just how right he is. First you dehumanize your political opponents--"If a rabid cougar
by atypicaluser 6y ago
OP writes:
> We just assume we're right.
And you follow up by proving just how right he is. First you dehumanize your political opponents--"If a rabid cougar gets loose..."--then you tell us what we need to do--"we take whatever measures we have to to get rid of it for the greater good of society."
And you claim it's the other side's speech that "is violent and damaging"?
P.S. At the time of this reply, it's not the current POTUS calling a sitting US Senator a "Goebbels". Care to guess where this is going?
- caconym_ 6y agoThe point of the cougar analogy is not to dehumanize anybody. It is to demonstrate that sometimes problems exist (problems as in configurations of reality that can be articulated as bad), and that doing nothing is often not the solution that will yield the greatest good in a utilitarian sense. I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. I'm curious, though—would you just let the cougar do its thing? Like, if that literally happened, and you were the guy at animal control who got the call?
- disgrunt 6y agoI reject your analogy on it's face as a banal attempt to justify incivility and barbarism towards those in which we disagree.
- caconym_ 6y agoOkay. But if you want to imagine I'm making a point I'm not making and respond to that rather than the point I am making, could you do it offline in a Word doc or something? There's already a lot of noise in this thread.