4 ms·
Relishing in other people's actions that were driven out of fear during a crisis when our institutions (media and state) failed to keep public trust for million
by mattboardman 4y ago
Relishing in other people's actions that were driven out of fear during a crisis when our institutions (media and state) failed to keep public trust for millions. Empathy, even for those who make foolish decisions is difficult but necessary, you should try to understand rather than judge.
- ergonaught 4y agoWhy is empathy "necessary"? Why "should" someone try to understand rather than judge? What's the actual rationale for it? What is the mutually agreed desired result of acting in those ways?
- mattboardman 4y ago>why is empathy necessary? I don't really have an objective answer for you. I do find personal value in empathy, I get less mad when I can understand why someone did something I disagree with. It doesn't change what they did nor does it excuse it. >What is the mutually agreed desired result of acting in those ways Harmony.
- troutwine 4y agoKeeping just to the utilitarian perspective, cooperative strategies in humans overwhelmingly have better outcomes in both individual well-being and output (innovation, manufacturing, zero-sun games). Cooperation is extremely hard to achieve and sustain without some empathy for your peers. Similarly, judgement runs counter to group cohesion, except in the divergent strategy of establishing an Us/Them dynamic, sustainable in the short term but leading to homogeneity, worse outcomes. Tossing the utilitarian perspective, being transactional and self-serving in your daily life tends to get you invited to less parties.
- shawnz 4y agoI think it will be easy for you to come up with some possible answers to these questions if you have some charity for their argument.
- brookst 4y agoPeople who pride themselves on lacking empathy are kind of trapped because no one can explain in a way that doesn’t require some empathy to understand.
- joenot443 4y ago>Why is empathy “necessary” This is a philosophical question that man has sought to answer since the Stone Age. Much smarter people than us have dedicated their lives to the study of ethics and come up with wildly differing ideas, I don’t think you’re going to find an objective answer here.
- mint2 4y ago[flagged]
- thrwawy74 4y agoI agree with you. There were several agencies putting out responsible messaging and trying to keep public trust. Ultimately it was a failure. Millions of people didn't trust the gov and turned to alternatives like this. I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. Key figureheads undermined public trust.
- fwungy 4y agoThe government's information was obviously was filled with inconsistencies that were obvious to anyone with the slightest prior mistrust of them. Ivermectin has a long history of safe and beneficial usage in the developing world, billions of doses. Yet it was actively discouraged as "horse medicine" here. Anyone with experience or relatives in the developing world would immediately question the veracity of such a discouragement.
- dragon-hn 4y agoIt was discouraged (correctly in hindsight) because there was no evidence it would do anything for Covid. It was called horse medicine because the unfortunate people that fell for the kooks resorted to vet sources for it because doctors correctly refused. I can’t believe the revisionist history on this.
- jimmaswell 4y agoI don't see it as necessarily relishing, just a dark joke.
- emccue 4y ago^