3 ms·
Glad it's worked out for you. But if you had been inspired to take charitable action by, say, being born again in evangelical christianity, should people abstai
by devindotcom 3y ago
Glad it's worked out for you. But if you had been inspired to take charitable action by, say, being born again in evangelical christianity, should people abstain from pointing out the problems with that institution? And does every article critical of such an institution need to be tempered with praise to satisfy those who have not experienced its dark side or who disagree with the premise?
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoBut is EA an institution? It seems to me like a big-tent philosophy; anybody (honest or dishonest) can declare themselves an adherent, and while there are several organizations that have set themselves up within the umbrella, there's nobody conferring official titles.
- SpicyLemonZest 3y agoI can't speak for the original commenter, but I would definitely have similar concerns about an article called "Evangelical Christianity Is A Welter of Lies, Hypocrisy, and Eugenic Fantasies". If you're trying to impartially inform people about what's going on in a particular movement, or argumentatively convince people sympathetic to the movement that they're wrong about it, it doesn't seem like a helpful framing. (It is, of course, a great framing if your goal is to dunk on people your readers don't like.)
- kdmccormick 3y agoYup, exactly. If the organization is truly bad, then facts will speak for themselves. IMO heavy editorialization is a sign of a weak argument.