7 ms·

I can see where both of you are coming from. Take a given single issue that is a flash point between liberals and conservatives. As a liberal you can say it’s

I can see where both of you are coming from. Take a given single issue that is a flash point between liberals and conservatives. As a liberal you can say it’s unreasonable. A conservative can see it as completely reasonable and logical. Furthermore what one country’s liberals can see as unreasonable can be considered quite reasonable by another country’a liberals. It’s really nuanced. For what it’s worth I think Trump is the worst and most embarrassing President in the history of the US. I have friends and family on the conservative side who voted for McCain and Romney who likewise think so and held their noses to vote for Clinton and Biden. But at the same time I can see why someone would have reasonably voted for Trump. I completely disagree with them. Very little parts of my life, desires, and visions for the future of this country (or the world in general) intersects with theirs. I hope the vast majority of their vision for humanity never comes to pass. But I can still see their reasons.

epgui 4y ago
Just to clarify what I mean when I use words like "reasonable", "patently unreasonable", or "correct"... - "correct" / "incorrect": for objective questions with no wiggle room. 2+2=4 is correct. Correctness, when applicable, only allows one answer. - "patently unreasonable": for something to be "patently unreasonable", there has to be no apparent or articulated line of reasoning which can lead to the conclusion. It may not be possible or feasible to prove incorrectness. It is patently unreasonable to vote for anyone for no reason, but it cannot be said to be incorrect. It is patently unreasonable to vote for a political party just because that's what your family does, or to engage with politics as if it were a mere spectator sport, but it cannot be said to be incorrect. - "reasonable": without any regard for whether you would come to the same conclusion, something is reasonable if there exists at least one line of reasoning which can justify the conclusion. Reasonableness, when applicable, allows for multiple answers. Even when a better answer exists, an inferior answer can be reasonable. I am able to say things like "it is reasonable to vote for a political party I do not like", and "it is patently unreasonable to vote for my favourite party in a given situation". --- > Take a given single issue that is a flash point between liberals and conservatives. As a liberal you can say it’s unreasonable. A conservative can see it as completely reasonable and logical. Given the definitions above (which are roughly the same as used by judges in admin law, I'm not just making stuff up here), the liberal person in your example is not being reasonable, and the conservative person is probably failing to distinguish between reasonableness and correctness.

epgui 4y ago

Just to clarify what I mean when I use words like "reasonable", "patently unreasonable", or "correct"... - "correct" / "incorrect": for objective questions with no wiggle room. 2+2=4 is correct. Correctness, when applicable, only allows one answer. - "patently unreasonable": for something to be "patently unreasonable", there has to be no apparent or articulated line of reasoning which can lead to the conclusion. It may not be possible or feasible to prove incorrectness. It is patently unreasonable to vote for anyone for no reason, but it cannot be said to be incorrect. It is patently unreasonable to vote for a political party just because that's what your family does, or to engage with politics as if it were a mere spectator sport, but it cannot be said to be incorrect. - "reasonable": without any regard for whether you would come to the same conclusion, something is reasonable if there exists at least one line of reasoning which can justify the conclusion. Reasonableness, when applicable, allows for multiple answers. Even when a better answer exists, an inferior answer can be reasonable. I am able to say things like "it is reasonable to vote for a political party I do not like", and "it is patently unreasonable to vote for my favourite party in a given situation". --- > Take a given single issue that is a flash point between liberals and conservatives. As a liberal you can say it’s unreasonable. A conservative can see it as completely reasonable and logical. Given the definitions above (which are roughly the same as used by judges in admin law, I'm not just making stuff up here), the liberal person in your example is not being reasonable, and the conservative person is probably failing to distinguish between reasonableness and correctness.