3 ms·
I hate this kind of reasoning. It comes up a lot “My wife is a would-be immigrant so I am sympathetic” Or sometimes “My partner is half X So I understand dis
by zht 3y ago
I hate this kind of reasoning. It comes up a lot
“My wife is a would-be immigrant so I am sympathetic”
Or sometimes
“My partner is half X So I understand discrimination against X”
Or even sometimes
“I am in category Y so there’s no way I can hate people in category Y”
I don’t think that line of reasoning makes sense. People often times carve out mental exemptions for people close to them that they care about, not for everyone in the same category. Further more, it is totally possible to love a person but not every quality about them. Also just because you are close to someone doesn’t mean you understand entirely their struggles
- cko 3y agoWhat would you call this? Inverse ad hominem?
- KMag 3y agoI intentionally didn't draw a causative link between my wife being a would-be immigrant and my being sympathetic. It's supporting evidence, not a causal relation. It's possible that you're often similarly misreading statements from others as implying causality. It's absolutely faulty logic to say I have relationship X to Y so I can't be Y. However, P(Not against Y | my relationship X to Y) > P(Not against Y) may certainly be valid reasoning. I certainly can't think of any Y where I'd take a tonights-bar-tab bar bet against the statement that people married to Y are more sympathetic on average toward Y than the average person. It's preemptive defense against inevitable knee-jerk "you're anti-immigrant" ad hominem attacks. I wish I didn't feel the need to preempt such diversions, but that's the world in which we live.
- fennecbutt 3y agoYeah as a gay dude I see this frequently in peeps "I used to hate gays until I found out my daughter was a lesbian". Sure it's nice for people to realise they were wrong, but it would sure be swell to skip all of the hate in between, for everyone involved.