3 ms·

Yes, in a way that's pretty selfish of you (and reflects typical western society). You want to feel good by patting yourself on the back saying "oh well, I did

by sgt 6y ago

Yes, in a way that's pretty selfish of you (and reflects typical western society). You want to feel good by patting yourself on the back saying "oh well, I did donate", and then expressing interest in any consequences later on caused by the transaction. We all do it, but we also know good intentions can be lined with consequences that you are partially responsible for.

audiometry 6y ago
Sorry, pal, with the exception of mentioning my 'rule' for this discussed case, as I think it's important, I don't discuss my donations with anyone, except occasionally my son (to try to push him to behaving with more empathy -- something teenagers are short on) So I reject your ad hominem attack. Your vein of typical sharp-tongued HN cynicism is very tedious. Moreover, your remark has the arrogance of assuming all consequences of action are knowable. They are not, but you will need to learn that yourself.
- webdood90 6y ago
  I don't think it's arrogant of him to legitimately criticize you. Why even reply to the thread if you're going to be so stubborn on your position?
michaelmrose 6y ago
Its actually an actually of having a healthy perspective on your obligations and others rights. Taking upon yourself the impossible obligation of knowing all possible ends puts you in a position to put upon them an unreasonable demand insofar as insisting that someone tell you how they plan to spend that buck. Even if they are going to spend it on drugs they wont tell you so you are forcing them to degrade themselves either way by lying or by proving they aren't going to spend it on drugs. Just say no if you think they are going to blow it on drugs or say yes without pretending their drug habit is the result of you giving a buck on a particular corner.
ineedasername 6y ago
There is nothing you can do in life-- including the choice of doing nothing-- that doesn't have the potential for negative consequences.

by sgt 6y ago

audiometry 6y ago

Sorry, pal, with the exception of mentioning my 'rule' for this discussed case, as I think it's important, I don't discuss my donations with anyone, except occasionally my son (to try to push him to behaving with more empathy -- something teenagers are short on) So I reject your ad hominem attack. Your vein of typical sharp-tongued HN cynicism is very tedious. Moreover, your remark has the arrogance of assuming all consequences of action are knowable. They are not, but you will need to learn that yourself.

webdood90 6y ago
I don't think it's arrogant of him to legitimately criticize you. Why even reply to the thread if you're going to be so stubborn on your position?

michaelmrose 6y ago

Its actually an actually of having a healthy perspective on your obligations and others rights. Taking upon yourself the impossible obligation of knowing all possible ends puts you in a position to put upon them an unreasonable demand insofar as insisting that someone tell you how they plan to spend that buck. Even if they are going to spend it on drugs they wont tell you so you are forcing them to degrade themselves either way by lying or by proving they aren't going to spend it on drugs. Just say no if you think they are going to blow it on drugs or say yes without pretending their drug habit is the result of you giving a buck on a particular corner.

ineedasername 6y ago

There is nothing you can do in life-- including the choice of doing nothing-- that doesn't have the potential for negative consequences.