3 ms·
I don’t understand how that’s relevant. Do you mean to say that ascribing motives to actions is always impossible? Because as I understand it, that phrase mean
by dullcrisp 2y ago
I don’t understand how that’s relevant. Do you mean to say that ascribing motives to actions is always impossible?
Because as I understand it, that phrase means that it’s fallacious to say that the purpose of some system is X if it in fact does not do X. Not that we can never ask why we are doing Z.
- jrflowers 2y agoIntention can be nebulous and difficult to nail down, and can also be lied about. Purpose, as an answer to “Why is this happening?” is easier to reconcile by just looking at outcomes. In the particular instance that this thread is about, the purpose of dismantling a system that saves lives is semantically obvious. For an analogy, if somebody is driving a car and slams on the brakes, the intention and the purpose of slamming on the brakes is obvious: to stop the car.
- defrost 2y ago> the intention and the purpose of slamming on the brakes is obvious: to stop the car. Not always, often it's to slow down or to control or initiate a drift. Hard braking can be done to warn a tail gater to back off, it's also done to sharply reduce speed when headed for a kangaroo or other road hazard .. even though the car can't be stopped in time the aim is to shed speed while staying straight before a probable impact and to increase the time for the animal to move. If someone is racing on tarmac or rallying on dirt they might practice BLAT - Brake Late, Accelerate Turning. When driving heavy or articulated vehicles drivers will brake and downshift on down grades to shed speed and not lose control to mass and gravity. Perhaps purpose is harder for outsiders to deduce.
- dullcrisp 2y agoOkay, but if I ask why did you stop here, the answer I’m looking for isn’t “to stop the car.”