3 ms·
What does this accomplish? I genuinely don't understand why this fallacy is so common, even trying to come at it from a psychology perspective. Something being
by happytoexplain 2y ago
What does this accomplish? I genuinely don't understand why this fallacy is so common, even trying to come at it from a psychology perspective.
Something being shocking is not the same as something being unforeseeable. Being shocked by shocking behavior doesn't make you some kind of idiot. Acting as if having emotions about immoral behavior is beneath you is self-aggrandizing.
I'm sorry for my tone, but I'm sick of this genre of internet comment in particular.
- blix 2y ago"Shocking" carries a meaning of a being sudden, surprising, or startling. It's this aspect that is being challenged, not the emotional reaction.
- dghlsakjg 2y agoShock in this context probably refers to the meaning of the word that is surprise, rather than the meaning of the word that is disgust or revulsion. Basically, people use the same word to mean subtly different things. Something giving you a shock can mean being startled, but not disgusted. Or it can be the inverse of that. > Something being shocking is not the same as something being unforeseeable. That is true only for one definition/common use of the word.