4 ms·

No offense but those are pretty weak arguments. I'm not looking to hurt specific individuals, but rather society as a whole; large social phenomena aren't the f

by lagadu 5y ago

No offense but those are pretty weak arguments. I'm not looking to hurt specific individuals, but rather society as a whole; large social phenomena aren't the fault of any individual (although granted some specific individuals may carry a lot of fault, given their positions, Trump and other far-right high-profile individuals such as Orban or Bolsonaro being a prime example of that but that's not what we're discussing here). Two outcomes: either my not taking the vaccine has no impact on society as a whole so it doesn't matter, or it helps having a negative impact in society as a whole and therefore it also directly or indirectly hurts the groups who upset me (be it via further restrictions, health or economic downturns), in which case I feel vindicated. Most importantly: in both cases my actions spite those who would pressure me into doing it which by itself is a good enough outcome for me. That last argument goes both ways: people who feel it's acceptable to bully me out of my autonomy should take personal responsibility for the choice they are making, so dismissing that argument is effortless on my part. edit: I should point out that for very personal reasons I won't be getting in to, autonomy over the self is something that I hold very close to my heart.

kybernetikos 5y ago
> I'm not looking to hurt specific individuals, but rather society as a whole I phrased it that way because I worry that in seeking to spite society as a whole you're missing the fact that you'll likely hurt specific individuals. Most of whom have nothing to do with the reasons you want to spite society. > in both cases my actions spite those who would pressure me They really don't. The people your actions (and public support of them) will most likely contribute towards hurting (and possibly killing) are those who are sick in other ways, or those who hold similar views to yourself. If you live in a democracy, there are much better, well tested ways for you to promote bodily autonomy without deliberately taking actions most likely to harm people you agree with or the sick and weak. I'd love to see the cause of bodily autonomy promoted in ways I could respect, but this action won't help with that. > people who feel it's acceptable to bully me out of my autonomy should take personal responsibility for the choice they are making, so dismissing that argument is effortless on my part. Well, I think it's a poor dismissal. If people are bullying you, then they need to be responsible for their bullying, not for what you do in reaction to it. If you're really insisting on people being responsible for other peoples reactions, then don't you worry what you'll be responsible for when people react to your behavior? It's my opinion that allowing yourself to be so affected by other people's views (whether it's towards spite or compliance) is fundamentally a less good way to live than deciding what you think is right and living according to that. I do understand the extreme self-hurting aversive reaction to behavior you don't like (and there are places for it), but the internet has made that kind of attitude dangerous - you'll find bullies on every side of every topic, and to let which bullies your filter bubble rubbed you against dictate your behavior in serious ways is to cede way too much of your precious autonomy.

by lagadu 5y ago

kybernetikos 5y ago

> I'm not looking to hurt specific individuals, but rather society as a whole I phrased it that way because I worry that in seeking to spite society as a whole you're missing the fact that you'll likely hurt specific individuals. Most of whom have nothing to do with the reasons you want to spite society. > in both cases my actions spite those who would pressure me They really don't. The people your actions (and public support of them) will most likely contribute towards hurting (and possibly killing) are those who are sick in other ways, or those who hold similar views to yourself. If you live in a democracy, there are much better, well tested ways for you to promote bodily autonomy without deliberately taking actions most likely to harm people you agree with or the sick and weak. I'd love to see the cause of bodily autonomy promoted in ways I could respect, but this action won't help with that. > people who feel it's acceptable to bully me out of my autonomy should take personal responsibility for the choice they are making, so dismissing that argument is effortless on my part. Well, I think it's a poor dismissal. If people are bullying you, then they need to be responsible for their bullying, not for what you do in reaction to it. If you're really insisting on people being responsible for other peoples reactions, then don't you worry what you'll be responsible for when people react to your behavior? It's my opinion that allowing yourself to be so affected by other people's views (whether it's towards spite or compliance) is fundamentally a less good way to live than deciding what you think is right and living according to that. I do understand the extreme self-hurting aversive reaction to behavior you don't like (and there are places for it), but the internet has made that kind of attitude dangerous - you'll find bullies on every side of every topic, and to let which bullies your filter bubble rubbed you against dictate your behavior in serious ways is to cede way too much of your precious autonomy.