4 ms·
Ha, I think I actually disagree with each of your points individually. But it is a persuasive argument, because the idea is always only as good as the outcome.
by cam_l 13y ago
Ha, I think I actually disagree with each of your points individually. But it is a persuasive argument, because the idea is always only as good as the outcome.
Derision is not extremism, that is to bastardise the meaning of both words.
If the target is an extremist, I absolutely think their view should be dismissed and suppressed. However making fun of their point of view - particularly in mistaking their argument for obvious trolling/sarcasm - will render it unusable or counter-productive as evidence of suppression.
As to the last point http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2QrWzsfghA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2QrWzsfghA
- codezero 13y agoExtremist is a relative definition though. When reacting to people and teasing/making fun of them or deriding them, keep this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport's_Scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allport's_Scale
- cam_l 13y agoNot deriding them, just deriding a particular point of view.. and doing so with humour. See above re: relativity.. plus I would note that the very definition of extremism means it is only relative insofar as it is a long way from everything else, which pretty much rules out edge cases. Allport's Scale was new to me, thanks!
- codezero 13y agoAh, I advocate deriding content, but it's very easy to slip from content to the person :)